# Angela Brewer, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rickey A. Brewer v. PACCAR, Inc. d/b/a PETERBILT MOTORS CO.

> Indiana Court of Appeals · March 27, 2018 · 98 N.E.3d 83

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9885927

## Case

- **Full name:** Angela BREWER, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rickey A. Brewer, Deceased, Appellants, v. PACCAR, INC. D/B/A Peterbilt Motors Co., Appellee.
- **Court:** Indiana Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** March 27, 2018
- **Citations:** 98 N.E.3d 83
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Mathias
- **Judges:** Barnes, Mathias
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9885927

## Opinion text

Mathias, Judge, concurring.
[45] While I agree with my colleagues that Angela has designated sufficient evidence for summary judgment purposes, I write to express my reservations about the broad legal discussion that reaches this result. W & W, a sophisticated trucking company, explicitly ordered the glider kit from PACCAR without the optional rear window or backup alarm. Moreover, W & W ordered the glider kit with wiring to install a backup strobe light, but the strobe light was never installed. Thus, in my view, W & W, a sophisticated user, was well aware of any potential danger posed by PACCAR's glider kit when it assembled the semi-tractor. And on appeal, the core of PACCAR's arguments is a thinly disguised sophisticated user defense.
[46] Our court has consistently held that the question of whether or not a manufacturer has discharged its duty under the sophisticated user exception is appropriately a question for the trier of fact. See, e.g., Natural Gas Odorizing, Inc. v. Downs , 685 N.E.2d 155 , 164 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997), trans. denied . Accordingly, I agree that summary judgment was inappropriate here, and the matter should be remanded to the trial court where PACCAR can appropriately make its sophisticated user argument before a jury.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9885927. Public record. Not legal advice.