A civil lawsuit filed in Hancock County Superior Court 1 shows a woman is suing the Fortville Police Department (FPD), a FPD officer, the Town of Fortville following a vehicle accident earlier this spring.
HANCOCK COUNTY — A civil lawsuit filed in Hancock County Superior Court 1 shows a woman is suing the Fortville Police Department (FPD), FPD officer Sanchez Williams, the Town of Fortville and American Family insurance company following a vehicle accident earlier this spring.
The lawsuit filed Aug. 28 states that on or about April 30 of this year, the defendant, Williams, negligently drove his vehicle, causing a collision with the vehicle driven by the plaintiff. According to a police report, the accident happened at 5964 W. Broadway, McCordsville.
The complaint has been filed for damages to be determined during a trial, the lawsuit states. Williams was in the course of his employment for the defendants, the Fortville Police Department and the Town of Fortville, making them liable for damages, the lawsuit states.
According to the court documents, the plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants for permanent injuries, pain and suffering in a reasonable amount to be determined at the trial of the cause for medical expenses. Funds would also include lost wages, property damage and other special expenses, for future medical expenses, lost wages, and other special expenses, court costs, and all other proper relief in the premises, the lawsuit states.
The court documents also state the plaintiff’s husband has suffered a loss of his wife’s services, society and companionship as a result of her injuries.
One of the exhibits filed to date states, the damages claimed are a direct result of partial negligence on the part of the Town of McCordsville, McCordsville Town Council, McCordsville Police Department, McCordsville Street Department, Hancock County, Hancock County Commissioners, Hancock County Sheriff’s Department, Hancock County Highway Department, State of Indiana, Indiana State Police and the Indiana Department of Transportation.
The exhibit states the above mentioned are negligent in the design, construction, upkeep, repair or replacement of regulatory and other signage; for negligence in failing to take the proper steps to correct the obvious defects at an unnamed location where the above named parties had actual knowledge or notice of a dangerous condition; for negligence in design, construction, upkeep, repair and maintenance of this location; for negligence in failing to post a reduced speed limit at a dangerous location; for negligence for lack of positive guidance at this location and for negligence in the driver’s failure to keep proper lookout and exercise due care; failure to apply brakes; failure to keep vehicle under proper control; failure to yield right of way; following too closely; failure to use proper speed; failure to warn by sounding the horn; reckless driving; failure to avoid collision by turning to the right or left; failure to operate at appropriate reduced speed at intersection, hill, curve, among other reasons.
Due to the case just being filed and opened in court last week no other court dates have been set in the matter and no other exhibits or details have been reported to the court yet.
