Indiana Supreme Court

Governor has met with Supreme Court finalists

March 2, 2012
Michael Hoskins
Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels wants to move quickly on appointing the state’s next Indiana Supreme Court justice. He has already met with the three finalists who are vying for that position.
More

Indiana justice finalists named

February 29, 2012
Michael Hoskins
Gov. Mitch Daniels will select next justice from a pool of two men, one woman.
More

Chief justice extends retirement date to March 23

February 24, 2012
IL Staff
As chair of the Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission, Chief Justice Randall Shepard oversaw on Thursday the narrowing of the list of candidates vying to replace him on the Supreme Court.
More

Commission names 3 justice finalists

February 23, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission has selected Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Cale J. Bradford, Indianapolis attorney Mark S. Massa, and Jane A. Seigel of the Indiana Judicial Center as finalists for an upcoming Indiana Supreme Court vacancy.
More

Justices address Batson challenges in 2 appeals

February 22, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled on two cases Wednesday that stemmed from Batson challenges, and in doing so, articulated the standard of review of such challenges when a defendant raises a Batson challenge at the trial level, but then brings up a different argument on appeal.
More

Supreme Court split over reducing man's sentence

February 22, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court was divided 3-2 over whether to reduce the sentence of a man who received the maximum 20 years for having cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school when police stopped his vehicle.
More

Small Claims task force meetings begin Wednesday

February 20, 2012
IL Staff
The newly created task force formed by the Indiana Supreme Court to look into the practices and procedures used in Marion County Small Claims courts will hold its first of three hearings Wednesday.
More

Nonsupport of dependent enhancement not based on number of children

February 17, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that under Indiana Code 35-46-1-5(a), the enhancement of nonsupport of a dependent child to a Class C felony because of an arrearage of $15,000 or more is triggered by the dollar amount owed, regardless of how many children the parent has.
More

Justice semi-finalist interviews Feb. 23

February 17, 2012
IL Staff
The seven lawyers in the running to be the next Indiana justice will be interviewed by the Judicial Nominating Commission Feb. 23.
More

Justices slash amount non-merit state employees can get in back pay

February 16, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has adjusted the time frame for which state non-merit employees who sued for back pay may be able to recover funds. Instead of the period going back some 20 years, the justices decided the non-merit employee’s time period should be the same as merit employees.
More

Justices decline Camm prosecutor case

February 16, 2012
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court decided Tuesday it will not disturb the ruling by the Indiana Court of Appeals that Floyd County Prosecutor Keith Henderson can’t be involved in the retrial of David Camm. Camm is set to be tried for a third time for the murders of his wife and two children.
More

Justices reformulate jury instruction

February 15, 2012
The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the denial of a man’s petition for post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. In doing so, the justices addressed the use and language of a jury instruction and rewrote it to make it clearer.
More

Justice applicant pool reflective of Indiana

February 15, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The percentage of women in the semi-finalist group to be the next state justice decreased as compared to the state's population.
More

Indiana Court Decisions Jan. 26-Feb. 8, 2012

February 15, 2012
IL Staff
Read For Publication opinions from Indiana's appellate courts and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
More

Justices dissent on denying transfer in wage payment case

February 14, 2012
Michael Hoskins
Two Indiana Supreme Court justices disagreed with their colleagues about not taking a case on the state’s wage payment statute, issuing dissent that described how they believe the justices should clear up perceived uncertainty about whether the law can be applied to certain claims before the Indiana Department of Labor.
More

Task force will examine Marion County's small claims courts

February 14, 2012
Michael Hoskins
A new task force will review the practices and procedures of the nine small claims courts within the state’s largest county, following critical reports last year suggesting litigants may not receive the same access to justice in each court or as parties have in other Indiana jurisdictions.
More

Justices take environmental, land rights appeals

February 13, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court accepted two civil cases last week on transfer, in addition to the two-high profile appeals involving legislative fines against lawmakers and Secretary of State Charlie White.
More

Fund-matching extension increases value of gifts to lawyer loan repayment program

February 13, 2012
IL Staff
Any gift contributed by a lawyer to the Indiana Bar Foundation’s Richard M. Givan Loan Repayment Assistance Program this year could potentially quadruple in value, thanks to fund-matching initiatives.
More

7 named as justice semi-finalists

February 9, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Four men and three women have been named semi-finalists to become the next Indiana Supreme Court justice.
More

High court to hear legislative fines appeal

February 8, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has taken the appeal of a Marion County judge’s decision that ordered Democratic members of the Indiana House be refunded the money withheld from their paychecks due to a walkout in 2011.
More

Justices take secretary of state case

February 8, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court decided Tuesday to hear the appeals of a Marion County judge’s decision that found Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White ineligible to hold office.
More

Justice interviews begin Wednesday

February 7, 2012
IL Staff
The interviews of the 15 applicants to be the next Indiana Supreme Court justice begin Wednesday afternoon in the Indiana Statehouse.
More

Judge orders refund of legislative fines

February 7, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Democratic members of the Indiana House who faced fines for failing to attend sessions in protest of right-to-work legislation will be reimbursed any amount withheld in 2011, according to a ruling from Marion Superior Judge David Dreyer. The judge also ordered that any fines imposed this session may not be collected.
More

Justices accept 2 cases

February 6, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to two cases, including one involving the validity of a search warrant.
More

Court agency uses Super Bowl week to test disaster plan

February 3, 2012
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court Division of State Court Administration is taking advantage of the influx of visitors to central Indiana this week to determine if the agency can function from a remote location in case of a disaster.
More
Page  << 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT