Court opinions

Department of Workforce Development scammed out of $2 million

April 19, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Department of Workforce Development announced Wednesday afternoon that it allegedly has been cheated out of $2.4 million in unemployment insurance benefits. Fifteen people have been indicted for allegedly scheming to use fake companies to claim benefits.
More

COA upholds denial of fugitive's request to file an appeal

April 19, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A woman convicted of murdering her husband in the 1970s who escaped from prison and remained a fugitive for 35 years isn’t entitled to file a petition for belated appeal because her willful act of fleeing prevented her attorney from pursuing the appeal.
More

Judges reverse grant of unemployment benefits

April 18, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has held that if an employee’s explanation for the behavior that led to his termination is another terminable offense, that provides just cause for termination. As a result, the judges reversed the decision to grant a fired man unemployment benefits.
More

COA split on ability to review case

April 18, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The majority on a personal injury case has dismissed it for appellate review, finding the Indiana Court of Appeals doesn’t have jurisdiction. The majority believed the case was not timely appealed.
More

7th Circuit upholds sentence for drug offenses

April 17, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Dealing with the issue for the first time, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a certificate of appealability is needed for the part of a case that challenges the denial of collateral relief.
More

Judge leaves attorneys on tax refund appeal

April 17, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Indiana Tax Court Judge Martha Wentworth has denied the State Department of Revenue’s attempt to disqualify the two attorneys representing a company in a refund dispute.
More

Mother's actions support contempt finding

April 17, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld finding a mother in contempt of court for not dismissing a protective order against her ex-husband as required by their dissolution decree. The judges also affirmed the award of compensatory damages and attorney fees to the father, but reversed a 10-day sentence imposed for future violations.
More

Judges order possession charge dismissed

April 17, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Relying on United States Supreme Court precedent, the Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed the denial of a man’s motion to suppress marijuana found on him after a traffic stop. The appellate court found the officers did not reasonably believe the man was armed and dangerous to justify the pat down.
More

Judges rule on easement dispute

April 17, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled partly in favor of a couple seeking to place a fence along their property line shared with a condominium complex, which would affect the use of a sidewalk by the condo homeowners.
More

COA rules in favor of previous shareholders in dispute with new owners

April 16, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Benton Circuit Court erred in denying partial summary judgment to the former shareholders of a garden accessories company, the Indiana Court of Appeals held.
More

Justices accept 1 case, deny 9

April 16, 2012
The Indiana Supreme Court has agreed to hear a first impression case concerning whether a mortgagee on record had an enforceable right under the mortgage.
More

7th Circuit rules on sentence reduction

April 12, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered a man resentenced because the District judge erred by not granting the defendant the one-level reduction under the United States Sentencing Guidelines that was triggered by the government’s motion.
More

Trial court erred in instructing jury in negligence case

April 11, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A divided Indiana Court of Appeals has ordered a new trial in a case alleging a product was negligently designed, with the majority finding the trial court erred when it instructed the jury on the rebuttable presumption under Indiana Code 34-20-5-1.
More

Evidence doesn't support enhanced possession charges

April 11, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Because the state failed to prove that an early training center located near the defendant’s home constituted school property for purposes of enhancing drug charges, the Indiana Court of Appeals ordered the man’s convictions be reduced.
More

COA reverses trial court in personal injury case

April 10, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed a trial court’s denial of a motion to transfer, holding that Marion County is not a preferred venue for the case.
More

7th Circuit holds dispute is a matter for national labor board

April 6, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that only the National Labor Relations Board has authority to hear a complaint from employees who brought a hybrid suit against an employer and labor union.
More

Appellate court dismisses small claims venue case

April 5, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has determined that a small claims venue question is not on the list of authorized interlocutory appeals, so it dismissed a case arising out of southern Indiana.
More

Homeowner association has authority to decide on new home proposal

April 5, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court’s ruling against two homeowners challenging their homeowners association’s interpretation of covenants on building a new home.
More

Majority reverses conviction based on meth manufacturing

April 5, 2012
Michael Hoskins
A divided Indiana Court of Appeals has determined that the state can’t use the amount of manufacturing materials and empty packets of ingredients at a person’s home to prove he was dealing in that substance, without clear evidence the drug would have been produced in that amount.
More

Court preserves woman's day in court despite delays

April 5, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed a trial judge’s order to dismiss a woman’s medical malpractice case because of her failure to comply with discovery deadlines and trial rules, finding that the decision to deny her a day in court was too harsh.
More

Panel disagrees on foreclosure settlement resolution

April 5, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled that federal law and housing regulations require that deeds in lieu of foreclosure release the borrower from any mortgage obligation, and the mortgage company issuing an agreement can use that federal language in the contract.
More

Summary judgment affirmed in favor of attorney

April 5, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
An attorney who withdrew as counsel for two related family-owned businesses did not make false and defamatory statements in explaining his withdrawal, the Indiana Court of Appeals held.
More

COA holds false customer review violates no-contact order

April 5, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s revocation of probation for a man who wrote a false review of his father’s cleaning company.
More

Judges affirm decision in speedy trial claim

April 4, 2012
Michael Hoskins
A Hendricks County judge did not err in denying a man’s motion that his criminal case be discharged because the state failed to conduct a speedy trial within one year of charges being filed, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
More

Court rules on estate's claim against insurer

April 4, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld a judge’s ruling against a California reciprocal insurance exchange in a dispute over whether the insurer would have to pay part of a million dollar judgment.
More
Page  << 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 >> 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