Indiana Supreme Court

Justices reduce molester's sentence to 110 years

June 28, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court found that an enhanced sentence for a man convicted of nine counts of molesting his girlfriend’s young daughter is warranted, but reduced the man’s 324-year sentence to 110 years.
More

Recount commission rules in favor of secretary of state

June 28, 2011
IL Staff
Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White will remain in office. The Indiana Recount Commission voted 3-0 in favor of White, finding the Indiana Democratic Party didn’t provide sufficient evidence that White wasn’t eligible to take office.
More

Justices take certified question on railroad issue

June 27, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted a certified question posed by the United States Court of Federal Claims regarding railbanking and interim trail use.
More

High Court accepts 7 transfers

June 27, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has taken seven cases on transfer, including a case in which the lower appellate court was split on a construction manager’s duty to an injured worker.
More

Justices discuss jury unanimity in molestation cases

June 23, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court addressed the issue of unanimous jury verdicts in child molesting cases Thursday, and adopted reasoning from the California Supreme Court when dealing with the “either/or” rule in cases where multiple instances are mentioned but the defendant faces only one charge.
More

Justices uphold admitting juvenile's confession

June 22, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has found that a juvenile court didn’t err in admitting a teen’s confession, finding the boy was given the opportunity for meaningful consultation with his mother and that he knowingly waived his rights. The justices did also emphasize that the waiver used should be altered to make it more clear.
More

Disciplinary actions - 6/22/11

June 22, 2011
See who has been suspended and who resigned.
More

Annual Supreme Court review shows more agreement, shifts in alignment

June 22, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Welcoming a new justice was undeniably the most notable moment for the Indiana Supreme Court in 2010. That lineup change captured the headlines, but it’s not the only item of interest for Indiana court-watchers.
More

Justices asked to rehear Barnes

June 22, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court is being asked to revisit a ruling on a person’s right to resist illegal law enforcement entry into one’s home, and 71 state legislators have signed an amicus curiae brief asking the justices to narrow their decision.
More

High court questions whether transactions are leases or security interest sales

June 21, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Examining whether a transaction between two businesses is a lease or a sale subject to security interest, the Indiana Supreme Court has adopted an approach used in Colorado. The court held that various factors, such as the economy, must be considered in each situation to decide that question.
More

Justices rule on lawyer liablity coverage case

June 21, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Questions exist as to whether the professional liability coverage carrier for a disbarred attorney misled two former clients about helping them collect on legal malpractice claims.
More

Supreme Court aligns with trial court in dog-attack case

June 21, 2011
Jenny Montgomery
The Indiana Supreme Court has affirmed a trial court judge’s finding that the city of Evansville and its animal control division are not liable in a dog attack that seriously injured a boy.
More

Supreme Court to hear arguments Tuesday

June 20, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday in two child molesting cases and one personal injury case.
More

High court denies rehearing in secretary of state eligibility suit

June 16, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court will continue to stay out of the suit involving Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White and whether he was eligible to run for office.
More

Judges, prosecutors to get pay raises

June 16, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard has approved a 1.3 percent pay increase for judges and prosecutors.
More

New state public defender, BLE director chosen

June 16, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Announcing two new appointments simultaneously, the Indiana Supreme Court has chosen the state public defender and director of the Board of Law Examiners.
More

Justices address incompetent defendants in 2 cases

June 14, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court handed down two opinions Tuesday in which the defendants, who were found to be incompetent at some point, argued that pending charges violated their rights to due process on fundamental-fairness grounds.
More

Justices suspend attorneys for not paying fees, doing CLE

June 14, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has suspended 210 attorneys for not complying with continuing legal education requirements or nonpayment of attorney registration fees.
More

7th Circuit dismisses law suit over bar exam

June 13, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed an Indiana man’s suit in which he claims he should be able to sit for the bar exam even if he didn’t go to law school. The federal appellate court dismissed it for failure to timely pay the required docketing fee.
More

Judges affirm motion to suppress after illegal police entry

June 10, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
An Indiana Court of Appeals judge wrote a separate opinion in an unlawful arrest case, emphasizing that the facts before the court differ from those before the Indiana Supreme Court justices in Barnes v. State.
More

Man’s Sixth Amendment right not violated

June 8, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The failure of a judge to inquire into a defendant’s written complaint about his public defender didn’t violate the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, the Indiana Supreme Court held Wednesday. However, the justices explained if a trial judge finds him or herself in a situation similar to the one presented, that judge should at least receive assurances from the public defender’s office that the complaint has been adequately addressed.
More

Legislative committee to look at Barnes decision

June 8, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
Not since daylight-saving time has an issue agitated Sen. Brent Steele’s constituents as much as the recent decision by the Indiana Supreme Court on illegal police entry.
More

Touched by controversy

June 8, 2011
Michael Hoskins
In the history of court controversies, a recent ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court has created public outcry and calls for change in ways that few others do.
More

Justices rule: No right to resist

June 8, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court caught many people off guard when it abolished the common law right of citizens to reasonably resist police from entering their homes, no matter the situation and regardless of whether the entry is legal.
More

Law firm managers plan for the worst

June 8, 2011
Jenny Montgomery
Like other businesses, law firms know it is vital to be able to serve clients during times of disaster. Locally, many firms have begun developing or have revisited business continuity plans – particularly after 2006 when a strong storm whipped through downtown Indianapolis and shattered the windows in a high-rise building, displacing several law firms.
More
Page  << 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 >> pager
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's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT