Michael Poore, et al. v. Indianapolis Public Schools
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE Indiana Supreme Court Supreme Court Case No. 21S-CT-105 Michael and Mary Poore, Individually and on Behalf of J.P., Appellants, –v– FILED Mar 18 2021, 9:46 am CLERK Indianapolis Public Schools and its Board of Education, Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court Appellees. Decided: March 18, 2021 Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, No. 49D14-1705-CT-18190 The Honorable James B. Osborn, Judge On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals No. 19A-CT-1439 Per Curiam Opinion Chief Justice Rush and Justices David, Massa, Slaughter, and Goff concur. Per curiam. The trial court entered judgment in favor of Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) on the Poores’ claims for breach of contract, negligence, and violation of the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act after IPS refused to pay for their son’s advanced math class at Butler University. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Poore v. Indianapolis Public Schools, 155 N.E.3d 643, 655 (Ind. Ct. App. 2020). The Poores sought transfer, joined by the State of Indiana as amicus curiae. The Poores, IPS, and the State agree that the opinion contains an incorrect statement: that International Baccalaureate (IB) courses satisfy the requirements of the Dual Credit Statute, Indiana Code section 20-3010-4. The Poores also challenge the Court of Appeals’ broader conclusion that IPS was not negligent because it complied with its duty to provide J.P. with dual credit classes. The Poores’ negligence claim in the trial court was premised on IPS’s duty to provide their son with the classes necessary to graduate with a Core 40 Academic Honors Diploma—a duty the Poores concede that IPS fulfilled. Appellants’ Third Am. Br. at 20-21. They therefore waived the more specific claim that IPS was negligent for failing to satisfy the Dual Credit Statute. See Collins Asset Group, LLC v. Alialy, 139 N.E.3d 712, 714-15 (Ind. 2020). Accordingly, we grant transfer and summarily affirm the Court of Appeals opinion but for Section II, 155 N.E.3d at 650-51, which we vacate. See Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A). And while we agree with the Court of Appeals’ conclusion that “IPS was not negligent,” 155 N.E.3d at 655, we vacate its stated reasoning. Judgment in IPS’s favor is warranted not “because [it] did not deny J.P. the benefit of early college credits,” but because IPS fulfilled the duty the Poores claimed it breached and the Poores otherwise waived their Dual Credit Statute argument. Id. Rush, C.J., and David, Massa, Slaughter, and Goff, JJ., concur. Indiana Supreme Court | Case No. 21S-CT-105 | March 18, 2021 Page 2 of 3 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS Alexandra M. Curlin Robin C. Clay Curlin & Clay Law Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES Liberty L. Roberts Kevin S. Smith Church Church Hittle & Antrim Noblesville, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR AMICUS CURIAE, STATE OF INDIANA Theodore E. Rokita Attorney General of Indiana Thomas M. Fisher Solicitor General of Indiana Kian J. Hudson Deputy Solicitor General Julia C. Payne Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana Indiana Supreme Court | Case No. 21S-CT-105 | March 18, 2021 Page 3 of 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
