A customer slips. An injury follows. A lawsuit lands on your desk. But not every premises liability claim belongs in front of a jury. In Indiana, summary judgment remains a powerful tool for ending cases that lack proof.

Courts don’t assume negligence just because someone got hurt. They look for evidence of duty, notice, breach, and causation. This guide explains why Indiana courts continue to grant summary judgment, and what that means for protecting your business.

What Is a Summary Judgment?

Summary judgment is a legal tool Indiana courts use to end a case before trial when the facts don’t support a claim. It applies when there’s no genuine dispute over the material facts and the law favors one side. In premises liability cases, that often means the plaintiff lacks evidence to prove negligence.

This doesn’t mean the judge weighs credibility or decides who to believe. Instead, the court asks a narrower question: even if the plaintiff’s evidence is taken as true, does it meet the legal standard required to move forward? If it doesn’t, the case stops there.

Why Summary Judgment Is Still Active in Indiana Premises Liability Cases

Summary judgment remains active in Indiana premises liability claims because courts demand evidence, not assumptions. Plaintiffs must do more than show an injury occurred. They must produce facts that support each element of negligence.

Indiana courts repeatedly emphasize that speculation doesn’t create a genuine issue for trial. When a plaintiff can’t show how a hazard formed, how long it existed, or that the business knew or should have known about it, summary judgment could end the case.

This standard protects businesses from claims built on hindsight. Judges apply summary judgment to filter out cases where the record lacks proof of notice, breach, or causation. That’s why, despite common belief, summary judgment continues to play a decisive role in Indiana premises liability litigation.

How Summary Judgment Works in Premises Liability Cases

In Indiana premises liability cases, summary judgment works by testing the evidence early. The business only needs to show that the plaintiff lacks proof on a required element of the claim.

Typically, a defendant wins summary judgment by affirmatively negating duty, breach, or notice, or by showing the plaintiff has no evidence on one of those points. If the record shows a gap the plaintiff can’t fill, the court ends the case before trial.

THE ROLE OF NOTICE IN WINNING SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Notice sits at the center of most premises liability cases. To survive summary judgment, the plaintiff must show the business created the hazard, knew about it, or should have known about it. When the evidence shows no employee observed the condition and no facts establish its duration, courts grant judgment as a matter of law.

Indiana courts consistently reject arguments that rely on assumptions about how long a condition existed. If the plaintiff can’t identify when a spill formed or how long it remained on the floor, notice falls apart.

HOW SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED

Courts grant summary judgment when the designated evidence shows no genuine dispute of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law. Judges don’t weigh credibility or resolve factual disagreements. They evaluate whether a real dispute exists at all.

In premises liability cases, courts focus on what the evidence proves, not what it suggests. If the plaintiff’s theory depends on inference rather than concrete facts, the case likely won’t reach a jury. Summary judgment acts as a safeguard against claims that rest on sympathy and speculation rather than evidence.

FILING PROCEDURES FOR A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

A motion for summary judgment relies on designated evidence submitted by both sides. The court considers depositions, affidavits, documents, and other admissible materials included in the record.

Once the motion is filed, the burden shifts to the non-moving party (in most cases, that’s the plaintiff) to show a genuine factual dispute. If the plaintiff fails to respond with evidence, the court rules based on the existing record.

Evidence Courts Rely On When Granting Summary Judgment

Preparing to file a motion for summary judgment highlights the value of early documentation for businesses. Inspection records, incident reports, and video footage often decide whether a case survives or ends at summary judgment. Here are a few types of evidence the courts will look for (and the types of evidence that will make the defense attorney’s job much easier when aiming to file a dispositive motion):

INSPECTION LOGS

Inspection logs show whether a business followed reasonable safety practices. When logs reflect regular checks of the area where the incident occurred, courts view them as strong proof that the business acted responsibly. Gaps or missing logs, on the other hand, give plaintiffs room to argue constructive notice.

EMPLOYEE STATEMENTS

Employee statements close in time to the accident help establish what staff observed before the incident and what they did not. Statements confirming no employee saw the hazard or received a report of it support the absence of notice. Just as important are statements affirmatively confirming that the area was inspected and appeared clear - without spills, defects, or hazardous conditions - before the incident occurred. Combine a statement with time-stamped photographs of the area, and you’ll build a very strong case for dismissal before trial.

Short Example Employee Statement

“I was working at the time of the incident and had recently been in the area. I did not observe any spill, defect, ice, or snow, and no hazard was reported to me before the incident.”

VIDEO SURVEILLANCE & PHOTOGRAPHS

Video footage and time-stamped photographs often become the most persuasive evidence. Videos and photographs can show when a condition appeared, how long it existed, and whether employees inspected the area. When footage and photographs contradict a plaintiff’s assumptions or prove that the plaintiff’s version of events is untrue, summary judgment frequently follows. Practical pointer - train employees to promptly capture both close-up photos or video of the immediate incident area and wide-angle footage from a distance to provide context and show the condition of the surrounding area.

WEATHER RECORDS

Weather records matter in cases involving water, snow, or tracked-in moisture. Courts use them to determine whether conditions were natural and expected or whether something unusual occurred. This evidence often supports defenses tied to natural accumulations. Oftentimes, a skilled attorney will obtain certified weather reports from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”), and these records may be obtained years after the fact.

INCIDENT REPORTS

Incident reports document what was observed immediately after the fall. When reports note the absence of a hazard or describe conditions consistent with normal operations, they undermine speculative claims. Courts treat contemporaneous documentation as more reliable than recollections formed later.

When Summary Judgment Works or Fails in Indiana Premises Liability Cases

Summary judgment works in Indiana premises liability cases when the evidence exposes a real gap in the plaintiff’s proof. Courts don’t ask whether an injury occurred. They ask whether the record supports a finding of negligence. When it doesn’t, summary judgment follows.

Courts routinely grant summary judgment when a business affirmatively negates notice. In Schulz v. Kroger Co., the court upheld summary judgment where employee testimony showed the area had been inspected within ten minutes of the fall. That short window defeated constructive notice and avoided turning the store into an insurer of customer safety.

Detailed inspection policies also matter. In Johnson v. Blue Chip Casino, the court granted summary judgment after the hotel showed comprehensive inspection procedures and no prior complaints. The absence of actual or constructive knowledge ended the case before trial.

Summary judgment also succeeds when hazards fall within expected risks. In Hoosier Mountain Bike Association v. Kaler, the court found the condition open and obvious and inherent to the activity, eliminating two required elements of the claim as a matter of law.

But summary judgment fails when defendants rely on gaps in the plaintiff’s case without offering affirmative proof. In Converse v. Elkhart General Hospital, the court reversed summary judgment because the hospital failed to negate knowledge or obviousness of the hazard. Pointing out weaknesses wasn’t enough.

The Bottom Line for Your Indiana Business

Summary judgment remains a powerful defense in Indiana premises liability cases for one simple reason: courts require proof. Injury alone doesn’t carry a case. Assumptions don’t fill evidentiary gaps.

If a plaintiff can’t show how a hazard formed, how long it existed, or that your business had notice, the case stops before trial. That standard protects businesses that operate responsibly and document their efforts.

The takeaway is practical. Inspection routines, employee training, incident reports, and preserved video don’t just help after an accident. They decide whether a claim survives at all. When your records tell a clear story, summary judgment stays very much alive.

Summary Judgement: Frequently Asked Questions

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT?

The purpose of summary judgment is to end a case before trial when the evidence doesn’t support a legal claim. Indiana courts use it to prevent juries from hearing cases built on speculation rather than proof. If a plaintiff can’t establish a required element of negligence, summary judgment resolves the case as a matter of law.

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED?

When summary judgment is granted, the case ends for the party that prevailed. The court enters judgment without a trial, and the defendant no longer faces liability on that claim. In most premises liability cases, this means the business avoids trial, jury exposure, and further litigation costs.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND A MOTION TO DISMISS?

A motion to dismiss tests whether a complaint states a valid legal claim on its face. Summary judgment goes further by examining evidence. In premises liability cases, claims often survive dismissal but fail at summary judgment because the plaintiff can’t prove notice, breach of duty, or causation once evidence is required.

Summary judgment protects Indiana businesses, but only when the facts and documentation are on your side. I help business owners evaluate exposure early and build defensible practices. Reach out to protect your business before a claim gains traction.

Summary Judgment is Alive & Well in Indiana Premises Liability Cases