JenniferNelson

Jennifer Nelson, managing and online editor, began writing for Indiana Lawyer in spring 2007. She previously was a reporter for IBJ Media’s Court & Commercial Record for 14 months.

Nelson won a second-place award in 2008 from the Indiana Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists for an IL story about the lack of resources for jurors who have to witness grueling evidence during criminal trials. While writing for CCR, she won first-place and second-place awards for business writing from the Hoosier State Press Association.

Nelson graduated from Indiana University with a bachelor's in journalism and political science. After graduation, she freelanced for several local publications before joining IBJ Media. In the fall and winter, she and her husband, Jonathan, can be found in Bloomington cheering on the Hoosiers in football and basketball.

Recent Articles

Judges reject property owner’s interpretation of tax sale statute

October 24, 2014
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed that the purchaser of property in a tax sale substantially complied with the statutory requirement that the owner of record was notified about the buyer’s intent to petition for a tax deed.
More

COA affirms seizure of gun from apartment without search warrant

October 22, 2014
The Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed a man’s misdemeanor handgun charge after finding the police did not need a search warrant to retrieve the gun after the man placed it inside an apartment in view of the officers.
More

COA: Bank should be allowed to intervene in foreclosure matter

October 22, 2014
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the denial of JPMorgan Chase Bank’s motion to intervene in a homeowners association’s attempt to foreclose on a home to fulfill a judgment. The COA found that the bank did not have actual notice of a pending action against the homeowner in 2007, as the association argued.
More

COA: Gas station did not commit spoliation regarding mat

October 22, 2014
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s decision to not instruct a jury in a personal injury action regarding the spoliation of evidence. Margaret Dawson, the injured party, had ample time to inspect the mat she tripped on before the store replaced it.
More

Justices rule on ‘exhaustion rule’ issue

October 22, 2014
The Indiana Supreme Court tackled issues of first impression Wednesday involving peremptory challenges and removing jurors for cause. The justices held that parties satisfy the “exhaustion rule” the moment they use their final peremptory challenge – regardless of whom they strike.
More

Majority reverses termination of incarcerated father’s parental rights

October 22, 2014
Finding the state did not prove that the parental rights of a man – who learned he was a father while incarcerated pending trial – should be terminated, two of the three judges on a Court of Appeals panel reversed.
More

Judges say Circuit split requires clarification from sentencing commission

October 22, 2014
A panel of judges on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a man’s 117-month prison sentence on drug and weapons charges, but two judges believed the case should have been heard en banc based on the importance of a sentencing issue.
More

Court reverses $1,660 attorney fee award in parenting time action

October 22, 2014
Because there is nothing in the record to show the court considered the resources of the parties when it awarded a guardian $1,660 in attorney fees, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed Wednesday.
More

Daughter’s cheating negates father’s obligation to pay for college

October 22, 2014
Finding that the “F” a Purdue University student received after her teacher discovered the student plagiarized comments from other students amounted to disciplinary action from the school, the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the decision that her father no longer had to pay a portion of her school expenses based on a previous court order.
More

Officers’ entry into home to chase bloodied dog unreasonable, justices rule

October 22, 2014
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that drug evidence obtained by police after they entered a home without a warrant to capture an aggressive dog should not have been admitted at the defendant’s trial. The justices held the search violated Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.
More
View All Articles

Recent Blog Posts

How do managing partners manage their social media?

September 17, 2014
Do you have a LinkedIn account? If you are a managing partner, then you most likely do, although your online presence may be begrudgingly, depending on your age.
More

No socks, big problem for 1 attorney

September 4, 2014
The order from Blackford Circuit Judge Dean Young has made headlines this week, requesting that Marion attorney Todd A. Glickfield put on some socks before heading to court.
More

Open floor plans the way of the future

August 27, 2014
In an effort to encourage mobility and collaboration and save money, walls are coming down in offices and work spaces are becoming more open.
More

Was work/life balance question sexist?

August 7, 2014
Indiana Justice Loretta Rush was asked during her interview about maintaining a work/life balance. But none of the men were asked about that issue at their subsequent interviews.
More

Jurors heeding judges’ requests not to use social media

July 31, 2014
Nearly 500 federal judges responded to a request by the Federal Judicial Center to report on how frequently jurors used social media to communicate during trials and deliberations over the past two years. The judges’ response: not that often.
More
View All Blogs
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT