Civil case

COA rules on negligence claims in library case

February 6, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
he Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment today in favor of engineering and construction companies in a lawsuit filed by a central Indiana library, finding the economic-loss doctrine bars the library's negligence claims against the companies.
More

Letter not covered by attorney-client privilege

February 4, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
A Southern District magistrate judge has decided a letter between the city of Madison's mayor and city attorney isn't protected by attorney-client privilege in a civil action seeking damages over strip searches of three women.
More

Man's claims against officers can proceed

February 3, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment in favor of police officers in a man's civil suit, finding the man may have Fourth and Fifth Amendment claims against them.
More

Court rules on agency record appeals

January 30, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
In two separate opinions, the Indiana Court of Appeals tackled the issue of timely and complete filing of an agency record.
More

Opinion invites high court to reconsider decision

January 29, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals invited the Indiana Supreme Court to revisit its ruling that held only children born alive fall under Indiana's Child Wrongful Death Statute. In a decision today, the majority of the appellate court panel felt bound by the high court's previous ruling.
More

COA clarifies unemployment benefits issue

January 29, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals used a case before it as an opportunity to clarify how an employee's eligibility for unemployment benefits should be determined when the employee is discharged for attendance issues.
More

Some Lake civil cases go to random filing

January 28, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Attorneys opening new civil cases in Lake County should note that a new random filing system is being put in place, a plan described as the most extensive use of this in the county's history.
More

COA: Wife is liable for mortgages

January 27, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a judgment against a woman who denied signing for mortgages that are now in foreclosure; however, the judges disagreed whether the mortgage holder proved default under the terms of the notes.
More

High court rules on landlord-tenant dispute

January 22, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Landlords must refund a security deposit and can't get money back for property damage if they don't adequately or timely notify tenants about those claims, but landlords can still recover unpaid rent and other losses, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
More

Summary judgment affirmed for dairy farm

January 12, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of a confined feeding operation in a dispute between the dairy farm and its neighbor over a tract of land and the impact of the farm on the neighbor's property.
More

Court erred in dismissing claim with prejudice

December 30, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a trial court's dismissal of a woman's claims against her former tenants, finding the court misinterpreted a previous appellate ruling to support the dismissal.
More

Parties can't pick certain provisions to enforce

December 29, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals addressed an issue of first impression today regarding whether a person could seek to enforce rights under a vehicle purchasing agreement he didn't sign but then disavow other provisions set forth in the same document.
More

Court rules on tort claims and wrongful death

December 29, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court tackled the issue of the interaction of the statute of limitations provision under the state's Wrongful Death Act and the statute of limitations provision for an underlying substantive tort claim in two opinions released Dec. 24.
More

Prisoner litigant's case deemed frivolous

December 24, 2008
Michael Hoskins
One of Indiana's most well-known pro se prisoner litigants continues to be a subject for the state's appellate courts.
More

Justices issue robo-call decision

December 23, 2008
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court says the state's two-decade old law on pre-recorded, autodialed calls isn't limited to those placed to consumers with commercial messages. But justices stopped short of deciding how the law applies to political messages, leaving that question for another day.
More

Court remands to recalculate attorneys' fees

December 19, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the eviction of a renter and an award of damages in favor of her former landlord, but it reversed the amount of attorneys' fees she has to pay because the trial court's rationale in determining the amount was insufficient.
More

No summary judgment in mailbox case

December 16, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The owners of a mailbox struck by a woman's car that left the road inexplicably aren't entitled to summary judgment on the woman's negligence claim, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed today.
More

Tax sale petitions OK because of lack of notice

December 15, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in favor of a woman in two separate cases involving the purchase of her property at tax sales in Franklin County after determining she received insufficient notice of the sales.
More

Judges disagree on trust jurisdiction issue

December 11, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
In a matter of first impression, Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed whether an Indiana probate court had subject matter and personal jurisdiction over a trust based in Virginia.
More

7th Circuit: Woman has claim for relief

December 9, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed today with a District Court's dismissal of a woman's complaint against the federal government, finding she had stated a claim for relief following her dismissal from her job as a result of a Federal Protective Service investigation.
More

Court tackles 2 first-impression issues

December 9, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled on a case today in which there were two issues of first impression, finding consolidation of a trial with a preliminary injunction hearing without notice isn't a reversible error unless a showing of prejudice can be made.
More

Law doesn't contain presumption on negligence

December 2, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals found a trial court committed a reversible error when it instructed a jury that Indiana law has a rebuttable presumption that children ages 7 through 14 can't be found contributorily negligent. The ruling came in a suit against a school for the death of a student.
More

Riverboat not covered by Jones Act

November 25, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
A casino riverboat that is indefinitely moored to the shore isn't considered a vessel in navigation under the federal Jones Act, so a riverboat worker can't bring a claim for compensation of injuries under the act, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today.
More

COA: Expenses apply under penalty period

November 25, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in favor of a woman who wanted her out-of-pocket payments to a nursing facility allowed as a spend-down expense, finding the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration's denial of her request would penalize her twice.
More

Court reverses joint tenancy interest ruling

November 17, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a finding that a mother and her daughter and son-in-law each held a one-half joint tenancy in a property, finding the parties actually held one-third undivided interest as joint tenants.
More
Page  << 21 22 23 24 25 >> 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 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