The Morel Company, LLC v. Sizewise Rentals, LLC
── The Morel Company, LLC v. Sizewise Rentals, LLC ──
Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
Date: May 29, 2026
Author: Robert Altice
Category: General
IN THE
Court of Appeals of Indiana
FILED
The Morel Company, LLC,
May 29 2026, 10:34 am
Appellant-Plaintiff CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
v.
Sizewise Rentals, LLC,
Appellee-Defendant
May 29, 2026
Court of Appeals Case No.
25A-PL-937
Interlocutory Appeal from the Ripley Circuit Court
The Honorable Jeffrey Sharp, Special Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
69C01-2305-PL-000005
Opinion by Judge Felix
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 25A-PL-937 | May 29, 2026 Page 1 of 28
Judge Altice concurs.
Chief Judge Tavitas dissents with a separate opinion.
Felix, Judge.
Statement of the Case
[1] In 2015, The Morel Company, LLC (“Morel”) and Sizewise Rentals, LLC
(“Sizewise”) entered into a five-year distribution agreement whereby Morel
would design and manufacture a medical device for hospital bedframes.
Sizewise would purchase the devices at a discounted price, rent them to
healthcare facilities, and pay Morel a “Rental Rate Share.” Five years later,
Sizewise communicated its intention to let the agreement expire before it
renewed or extended. The parties disputed whether the agreement permitted
Sizewise to do so or instead extended automatically. The trial court denied
both parties’ motions for summary judgment, prompting this interlocutory
appeal. The parties raise two issues, which we restate as the following single
issue: Whether the trial court erred by denying their respective motions for
summary judgment.
[2] We reverse.
Facts and Procedural History
[3] Morel is a medical device manufacturer whose principal product is an
“automated patient repositioning device,” Appellant’s App. Vol. II at 96,
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 25A-PL-937 | May 29, 2026 Page 2 of 28
known as the “Hercules Patient Repositioner” (the “Hercules”), Appellant’s
App. Vol. VI at 127. The Hercules attaches to hospital bedframes and enables
caregivers “to push a button to pull a patient up in bed.” App. Vol. III at 112.
[4] Relevant for this appeal, Sizewise is a distributor of specialty medical
equipment. Sizewise specializes in the “bariatric” market, Appellant’s App.
Vol. III at 10, which consists of medical devices tailored to obese patients. One
line of Sizewise’s business was the sale and rental of “bariatric bedframes,” id.,
which are several inches wider than standard 36-inch hospital bedframes.
Sizewise charged customers (e.g., hospitals, care centers, etc.) a daily rental rate
for use of the bedframes.
[5] In 2014, Sizewise representatives discovered the Hercules at a trade show and
became interested in adding it to Sizewise’s portfolio of products. At the time,
the Hercules was only designed to fit standard hospital bedframes. Sizewise
was interested in working with Morel to distribute the Herc
← Back to Paul Felix's profile
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}