Jennifer Pennington v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Health and Fitness

── Jennifer Pennington v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Health and Fitness ── Court: Indiana Court of Appeals Date: June 05, 2026 Author: Dana Kenworthy Category: General IN THE Court of Appeals of Indiana Jennifer Pennington and Josh Pennington, FILED Jun 05 2026, 9:49 am Appellants-Plaintiffs, CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc., d/b/a Beacon Health and Fitness, Appellee-Defendant. June 5, 2026 Court of Appeals Case No. 25A-CT-1683 Appeal from the St. Joseph Circuit Court The Honorable John E. Broden, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 71C01-1804-CT-160 Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 25A-CT-1683 | June 5, 2026 Page 1 of 17  Opinion by Senior Judge Crone Judges Mathias and Kenworthy concur. Crone, Senior Judge. Statement of the Case [1] Jennifer Pennington swam in a new pool that was owned and operated by Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc., d/b/a Beacon Health and Fitness (“Beacon”). During her swim, she was injured when she struck her head on a concrete partition. [2] Jennifer and her husband Josh sued Beacon for negligence. Beacon raised an affirmative defense of nonparty fault, naming Spear Corporation (“Spear”) and Panzica Building Corporation (“Panzica”) because they were involved in designing or building the pool. Beacon had the burden of proving this defense. [3] The Penningtons added Panzica and Spear as defendants. All of the defendants filed motions for summary judgment. Beacon opposed Panzica’s motion. The trial court granted summary judgment to Spear and Panzica, thereby effectively also granting summary judgment on Beacon’s affirmative defense. The court denied Beacon’s summary judgment motion in part. The court’s summary judgment rulings were for the most part affirmed on appeal. [4] The court presided over a jury trial for the Penningtons’ negligence claims against Beacon. Prior to trial, the court granted, over the Penningtons’ Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 25A-CT-1683 | June 5, 2026 Page 2 of 17  objection, Beacon’s motion to amend its answer and raise a nonparty defense. At trial, Beacon presented evidence and argument that Spear and Panzica were partially or completely at fault for Jennifer’s injuries. The jury found in favor of Beacon, determining that it was not at fault. [5] The Penningtons appeal, arguing that the trial court should not have allowed Beacon to amend its answer to raise a nonparty defense. Concluding that the trial court erred, and that the error was not harmless, we reverse and remand. Issues [6] The Penningtons raise four issues, which we consolidate and restate as: I. Whether the trial court erred in allowing Beacon to amend its answer to raise a nonparty defense involving parties whose lack of fault had already been determined. II. Whether the trial court’s error was harmless. Facts and Procedura