James T. Mitchell v. 10th and the Bypass, LLC, and Elway, Inc., 973 N.E.2d 606

LLC sued Mitchell, Elway, J.T. Mitchell, Inc., and Sevan for environmental damage at the 10th and The Bypass site; alleged Mitchell personal liability under the responsible corporate officer doctrine.
Mitchell moved for partial summary judgment on personal liability; LLC cross-moved on that issue.
January 11, 2010 order granted Mitchell partial summary judgment; no final 54(B) directive.
June 3, 2011 LLC and Elway moved to vacate and tendered Susan Johnson's statement and deposition.
Trial court vacated the January Order, reinstated Mitchell as a defendant, and relied on Trial Rule 54(B) revision to permit reconsideration based on new evidence.
Mitchell appeals, arguing Rule 56(C) timing and due diligence under Rule 60(B); court affirms, holding 54(B) controls and the order to vacate was not an abuse of discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rule 56(C) timing governs new evidence after partial SJ	Mitchell argues the new evidence designation after 56(C) is barred.	LLC/Elway contend vacating partial SJ is permissible to consider new evidence.	54(B) controls; vacate allowed.
Whether the January Order was final under 54(B)	The order should be final as to Mitchell.	The order was interlocutory and not final.	The order remained interlocutory and subject to revision.
Whether Rule 60(B) due diligence applies to interlocutory orders	Allstate diligence standard should apply to vacatur.	Rule 60(B) only applies to final judgments.	60(B) does not apply to interlocutory orders.
Whether the trial court properly weighed the factors for revision under 54(B)	Newly designated Johnson evidence undermines the January Order.	The evidence is highly relevant and justifies revision.	The court did not abuse its discretion; vacating was proper.

HomEq Servicing Corp. v. Baker, 883 N.E.2d 95 (Ind. 2008) (securing time limits under 56(C) not controlling for interlocutory relief)
Desai v. Croy, 805 N.E.2d 844 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (extension of time to designate evidence under 56(C))
City of Elkhart v. SFS, LLC, 968 N.E.2d 812 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (untimely designation of evidence generally not considered)
Borsuk v. Town of St. John, 820 N.E.2d 118 (Ind. 2005) (extension/limits under 56(C) considerations)
Berry v. Huffman, 643 N.E.2d 327 (Ind. 1994) (final judgment standards; Rule 54(B) applicable)
Gibson v. Evansville Vanderburgh Bldg. Comm’n, 725 N.E.2d 949 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (inherent power to reconsider interlocutory decisions)
Hartig v. Stratman, 760 N.E.2d 668 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (due diligence and 54(B) considerations on reconsideration)
Sequa Coatings Corp. v. Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, 796 N.E.2d 1216 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (reconsideration of partial SJ under 54(B) and timing of newly designated evidence)
Sequa Coatings Corp. v. Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, 800 N.E.2d 926 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (clarified on reh’g; restricts new evidence when not properly before court)
Allstate Insurance Co. v. Fields, 842 N.E.2d 804 (Ind. 2006) (Rule 60 applies to final judgments only)
John Simmons Co. v. Grier Brothers Co., 258 U.S. 82 (U.S. 1922) (authority cited on revision under 54(b))