City of Peru v. Lewis
950 N.E.2d 1
Ind. Ct. App.2011Background
- In 2002, Peru entered into an interlocal agreement creating a centralized dispatch system (Central Communications) for city and county emergency services.
- Miami County later established a county enhanced 911 service arrangement with a private dispatch provider, superseding prior agreements.
- On March 11, 2004, Tracy Lew is reported a fire in her home; 911 dispatch advised firefighters that occupants might be inside.
- Firefighters arrived and undertook ventilation, search, and rescue efforts; Virginia Lewis died from fire injuries.
- The Lewises sued the City Defendants and others in 2005 for negligent firefighting and rescue, among other claims.
- The trial court denied the City Defendants’ summary judgment motion; this interlocutory appeal followed challenging governmental immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Fire Department and Central Communications System are proper immunity-defeated defendants | Lewises argue these city entities are liable for negligent firefighting/rescue. | City contends both entities are administrative vehicles not subject to liability; immunity applies. | Yes; they are immune or not proper entities for suit. |
| Whether Peru is entitled to common law governmental immunity for alleged firefighting/negligence | Lewises claim immunity does not apply to failure to provide adequate protection. | Peru relies on Gates/Lamb/Benton line to preserve immunity for firefighting context. | Immunity bars the claims; City Defendants entitled to summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gates v. Town of Chandler, 725 N.E.2d 117 (Ind.Ct.App.2000) (fire protection akin to police protection; immunity for negligent fire response)
- Lamb v. City of Bloomington, 741 N.E.2d 436 (Ind.Ct.App.2001) (fire department negligence in fighting fire protected by common law immunity)
- Ellis v. Martinsville, 940 N.E.2d 1197 (Ind.Ct.App.2011) (mutual aid context; immunity when no willful or wanton misconduct)
- Benton v. City of Oakland City, 721 N.E.2d 224 (Ind.1999) (preservation of immunity in limited municipal service contexts)
- Campbell v. State, 259 Ind. 55, 284 N.E.2d 733 (Ind.1972) (abrogation of almost all sovereign immunity; exceptions retained by legislature)
- O'Connell v. Town of Schererville, 779 N.E.2d 16 (Ind.App.2002) (discussion of continued immunity in governmental functions)
- Slay v. Marion Cty. Sheriff's Dept., 603 N.E.2d 877 (Ind.Ct.App.1997) (definition of political subdivisions and related immunity principles)
- Rich v. Fidelity Trust Co. of Indianapolis, 137 Ind.App. 619, 207 N.E.2d 850 (Ind.Ct.App.1965) (non-existent entity cannot be sued; departmental structures affect liability)