Court Opinion

ID: 9540263
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:14:08.547156+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:47.632565
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Re-Hearing
(Dissent)
Mote, P. J.
— Our dissent to the original opinion and decision reported in 218 N. E. 2d 556 (1966), was not based upon the conclusions stated by the majority on Petition for Rehearing. As a matter of fact we would be required to hold that the specifications of negligence were sufficient to withstand demurrer. The deficiency in the complaint to which the demurrer was sustained lies in the fact that the said complaint does not allege facts sufficient to permit appellant the opportunity to establish by evidence the necessary requisites that appellee owed any duty whatsoever to appellant.
We tried to point out the deficiency in our dissenting opinion. We regard as essential obligations of duty owing by the defendant to plaintiff in an action of this character. Not only is it necessary to allege facts showing such duty; it also is necessary to prove the same once the matter comes to trial. Appellee’s demurrer relied upon the lack of allegation of facts .concerning this duty which make the complaint fatally de*426fective and the demurrer, in our opinion, was properly sustained.
Note. — Reported in 218 N. E. 2d 556. Rehearing denied reported in 221 N. E. 2d 693.