WARSAW — Arguments in a motion by The Papers Inc. to dismiss its participation in a lawsuit by Atta Belle Helman and Larry Dwayne Helman were heard by Kosciusko Circuit Court Judge Michael Reed. After approximately 40 minutes of hearing from counsel for the defendant and plaintiff, Reed took the matter under advisement stating he would rule as quickly as possible.

Philip E. Kalamaros, St. Joseph, Mich., argued the motion on behalf of The Papers Inc. with Bradley P. Colborn, South Bend, presenting arguments for the Helmans.

Kalamaros presented two supreme court cases, which he felt were pivotal points in the case. Both cases referenced “duty” as a question of law. One case involved a shooting at a business, the other involved a party in a basement in which alcohol was served to minors. Kalamaros argued the outcomes were not foreseeable, such as this case. He also argued the company had no direct involvement in the shooting and it should not be included in a “joint enterprise” or element of control.

The basis of Kalamaros’ argument was the claim was not specific enough to identify a recognition for the cause of action in the case or the claim needed to be more specific.

Colborn argued the issue of duty of the company over its employee using a scenario of a company knowing an employee likes to take a few drinks in the afternoon and allowing them to drive to a hearing and being involved in an accident. He also used the scenario of four students conspiring to detonate a bomb. While three commit the act the fourth knew and helped in the planning, but did not fully understand but was a party to the actions.

Colborn’s argument was Stacey Staley, an employee of The Papers Inc., participated in the scope of the job and the company has liability for her actions. Additionally he stated the company’s involvement dealt with her employer being aware of the propensity of her actions and failed to stop that.

Colborn told the court instead of listing just seven counts in the suit, they could spell it out further with 21 counts. “We can do that.”

Kalamaros’ rebuttal focused on the negligence per se of the company and the joint enterprise (lumping all persons involved into the suit). “You don’t have her shooting, causing battery. Somebody else was doing the activity. Some of the information came from her.” He added the suit is putting the company in somebody else’s actions. “She wasn’t even there,” said Kalamaros.

Kalamaros referenced items on a blackboard and with the wipe of an eraser took it all away, instead of leaving portions. “It is insufficient,” he stated about the information “The Papers Inc. was not there … don’t see a statute or case law regarding mere allegations,” he argued. “There is not sufficient court of law.”

Also present were Jay Rigdon, counsel for Barnett’s Bail Bonds Inc., Alex Bowman, counsel for Tad S. Martin, and Linda L. Vitone, counsel for Stacey Staley. Staley filed a joinder to The Papers Inc., motion to dismiss. No arguments were heard from these attorneys.

The complaint and jury demand was filed by the Helmans June 6 in Kosciusko Circuit Court. The suit is against Barnett’s Bail Bonds Inc., The Papers Inc., Staley, Tadd S. Martin, Daniel S. Foster and Michael C. Thomas and stems from the death of Gary Helman Aug. 25, 2014.

No specified dollar amount is being sought in the eight-count complaint. What the Helmans are seeking are compensatory damage to be determined, attorney fees and treble damages, cost of the action and all other relief.

Larry Helman was injured in the shooting at their home. Atta Helman was at the residence when the shooting incident occurred, according to police reports at the time of the shooting.

The counts in the complaint are: negligence against all defendants, and individually against Barnett’s and The Papers; trespass against Martin, Foster and Thomas as agents of Barnett’s; residential entry, intimidation and battery to Atta Helman and battery to Larry Helman against Martin.