Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
McCall v. State Department of Natural Resources Division of Forestry
Citations: 821 N.E.2d 924; 56 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 313; 2005 Ind. App. LEXIS 163; 2005 WL 288652Docket: 49A02-0402-CV-136
Court: Indiana Court of Appeals; February 8, 2005; Indiana; State Appellate Court
Mary D. McCall appealed the dismissal of her negligence complaint against the Indiana Department of Natural Resources Division of Forestry and Vallonia State Nursery, which she filed in Marion Superior Court, alleging that the defendants provided defective black walnut seedlings. The trial court dismissed her case with prejudice, determining that it was filed outside the applicable statute of limitations. McCall argued her complaint fell under the ten-year statute of limitations for breach of contract claims, while the defendants contended it was subject to a two-year statute of limitations for tort claims. The court reviewed the facts: McCall purchased 1,000 seedlings in 1993 and 1994, and her complaint, alleging negligence and breach of a partnership in tree planting, was filed on November 21, 2003. The defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, which the trial court granted, concluding McCall’s complaint was time-barred under the two-year limit for tort claims. McCall's motion to correct the error was denied. The court affirmed the trial court's decision, emphasizing that the statute of limitations for tort claims applied, not the ten-year limit for breach of contract claims as McCall maintained. McCall's complaint against the Defendants lacked an allegation of a contractual relationship and did not present a written contract to the trial court. The nature of her complaint is identified as a claim for breach of implied warranty rather than tort or contract. McCall contended that the Defendants failed to deliver suitable black walnut tree seedlings, despite their claim to provide "high quality plant materials." Under Indiana law (Ind.Code § 26-1-2-315), an implied warranty exists when a seller knows the specific purpose of goods and the buyer relies on the seller's expertise, unless explicitly excluded. The law implies that nursery trees sold for transplanting must be fit for that purpose, and any breach of implied warranty must be filed within four years of the cause of action arising (Ind.Code § 26-1-2-725). McCall ordered the seedlings in November 1993 and 1994, and she indicated planting them in spring 1995, which means her cause of action accrued then. However, her complaint was filed on November 21, 2003, exceeding the four-year statute of limitations. Consequently, the trial court's dismissal of her complaint was upheld, as it was not erroneous. Additionally, a document included by McCall did not establish a binding agreement, as it was unsigned and lacked specific terms related to her purchase.