The Indiana Court of Appeals recently revived a personal injury lawsuit filed by Kiera Isgrig, a student who was seriously injured when a window unexpectedly fell out of the wall and struck her while she was studying at Indiana University Bloomington. This decision provides an important reminder of property owners’ responsibilities to maintain safe premises—and of how the legal doctrine of res ipsa loquitur can be used to establish negligence when dangerous incidents speak for themselves.
The Incident
In April 2018, Isgrig was studying in Swain Hall on IU’s Bloomington campus when a large window fell from the wall and struck her on the head. The impact shattered the glass and sent shards across the room. Isgrig and her friends had not touched or tampered with the window prior to the incident.
A university carpenter later found two broken sash springs in the window, but stated that this alone would not typically cause a window to fall without warning. Maintenance records showed that IU only performed “reactive” maintenance—responding to complaints rather than proactively inspecting or repairing windows. The last work on that particular window had occurred more than a year earlier.
Legal Arguments and Trial Court Decision
Isgrig sued the Trustees of Indiana University, claiming negligence under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which allows an inference of negligence when an injury occurs in a manner that typically doesn’t happen without someone’s fault, and when the responsible party had exclusive control over the dangerous item.
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the university, ruling that res ipsa loquitur did not apply. The court reasoned that IU lacked actual or constructive knowledge of any defect and did not have exclusive control over the window.
Court of Appeals Reverses
The Court of Appeals disagreed and reversed the ruling, allowing Isgrig’s case to move forward. The appellate court held that:
• A window suddenly falling out of a wall is not an event that ordinarily occurs absent negligence.
• The university maintained exclusive control and management over the window, especially given that it was a fixture of the building and students were not expected to service or modify it.
• Preventive maintenance was lacking, further supporting a possible inference of negligence.
The court clarified that res ipsa loquitur can apply in premises liability cases—especially when the injury involves fixtures or components (like windows or ceiling lights) that are not typically disturbed by the public.
What This Means for Injury Victims
This case emphasizes that even when a property owner claims ignorance of a defect, the nature of the incident itself can sometimes establish liability. If you or a loved one has been injured by a building defect—like falling windows, broken handrails, or collapsing structures—don’t assume you have no case just because no prior complaints were filed.
The law recognizes that some accidents simply should not happen. And when they do, the responsible parties may be held accountable.
If you’ve been injured due to unsafe premises in Indiana, contact Trial Lawyer Marc Sedwick for a free consultation. We can evaluate whether res ipsa loquitur or other legal doctrines may apply in your case.