Court Opinion

ID: 9524843
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:57:40.951515+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:12:06.984546
License: Public Domain

CRONE, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. I cannot agree with the majority's determination that the phrase "accident or collision" in Trial Rule 75(A)(3) can only mean "tortious conduct" in the context of this case. The plain language of the rule simply does not lend itself to such an interpretation.
"Accident" is commonly defined as "[a]n unexpected and undesirable event, especially one resulting in damage or harm{.]" American HEriItace Dicrionary (4th ed.2000), available at Attp://dictionary. reference.com{browse/accident (last visited Nov. 3, 2006). In my view, this term could logically. encompass not only the driver's act of leaving the roadway, which occurred in Randolph County, but also-or rather-the flipping of the vehicle and the ejection of Chamness, both of which occurred in Delaware County. In fact, there can be no tort here without damages. Therefore, I conclude that the trial court would have been within its discretion if it had found that the accident occurred in Delaware County.3
As for the location of the "collision" for purposes of determining venue under Indiana Trial Rule 75(A)(3), Chamness contends that the car was "airborne" after leaving the Randolph County roadway and that it collided with the ground in Delaware County. Randolph County characterizes this incident as "simply a vehicle rolling on the ground" and claims that it does not amount to a collision. Appellant's Br. at 8. I think that Randolph County's definition of "eollision" is overly strict, however.
"Collide" is commonly defined as "(tlo come together with violent, direct impact." Tre Amsrican HErmmace Dictionary (4th ed.2000), available at http://dictionary. reference.com/browse/accident (last visited Nov. 8, 2006). It is true that the accident report does not specifically state that the car was in the air at any time during this incident. The report does indicate, however, that "[the driver] drove straight off into the ditch. The vehicle then traveled into a muddy field which caused it to begin to flip end over end. The vehicle rolled at least twice ejecting both rear passengers as it rolled." Appellant's App. at 39. The reporting officer also drew a diagram showing two distinct imprints of the top of the vehicle in the Delaware County ground, apparently made as the vehicle flipped pri- or to coming to rest on its tires. Whether the vehicle was literally airborne is irrelevant here, as it is obvious that it collided with the ground in Delaware County at least twice with a force of impact hard enough to leave an imprint and hard enough to cause Chammess to be ejected and injured. This set of facts satisfies the "collision" requirement in Indiana Trial Rule 75(A)(3).
For the reasons stated above, I conclude that Delaware County is a preferred venue in this case. Therefore, I would affirm the trial court's denial of Randolph County's motion to transfer venue.

. In denying Randolph County's motion to transfer venue, the trial court did not indicate its reasoning for the decision, i.e. whether it found that the "accident' or the "collision" or both occurred in Delaware County.