Court Opinion

ID: 9724764
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 11:12:03.581171+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:05.317003
License: Public Domain

HOFFMAN, Presiding Judge,
concurring in result.
1 concur in result. This Court has repeatedly observed that the language of Seymour regarding an outrageous conduct exception to enforcement of law immunity was dicta.
See, e.g., Indiana Dept. of Correction v. Stagg (1990), Ind.App., 556 N.E.2d 1338, 1344; Riggin v. Bd. of Trust. of Ball State Univ. (1986), Ind.App., 489 N.E.2d 616, 631; Jacobs v. City of Columbus, Etc. (1983), Ind.App., 454 N.E.2d 1253, 1260. Consequently, the language did not become the law and is not binding. Koske v. Townsend Engineering Co. (1990), Ind., 551 N.E.2d 437, 443.
SULLIVAN, Judge,
concurring.