Court opinions
COA clarifies emotional distress claims
May 18, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals used an opinion today to clarify how to treat an independent action for emotional distress brought
either in combination with the Wrongful Death Statute or as part of the Medical Malpractice Act.
MoreJudges differ in non-compete agreement case
May 18, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn a legal dispute regarding a non-compete agreement, the Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed as to whether the agreement
could be enforced if the former employee's clients voluntarily left and contacted him to continue to be their accountant.
MoreBMV policy needed to prevent identity theft
May 15, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe inconvenience of a few Hoosiers outweighs the very real threat of identity theft, so the trial court was correct in denying
a preliminary injunction against the Bureau of Motor Vehicle's verification of records using Social Security Administration
data, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today.
MoreCOA: Manufactured home subject to law
May 15, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals determined that manufactured mobile homes are subject to Indiana's common law warranty of
habitability, so it reversed the grant of summary judgment in favor of a manufacturer in a homeowner's property damage
and personal injury complaint.
MoreJustices rule on uninsured motorist statute
May 14, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn an issue of first impression, the Indiana Supreme Court had to decide whether an insurance company's uninsured motorist
policy - which requires the bodily injury be sustained by an insured - violates the state's uninsured motorist statute
and is unenforceable.
MoreCOA: No preliminary injunction against casinos
May 14, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges agreed a city isn't entitled to a preliminary injunction to order riverboat
casinos to make payments to the city, but the judges disagreed as to why the city didn't meet its burden to prove an injunction
was necessary.
MoreCOA: Just running red light not reckless
May 13, 2009
Jennifer NelsonRuling on the issue for the first time, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that not stopping at an intersection cannot, without
more evidence, constitute criminally reckless conduct and establish a prima facie case.
MoreJury instruction requires new damages trial
May 12, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA jury instruction the Indiana Court of Appeals found to incorrectly state the law required the court to remand for a new
trial on damages in a negligence suit.
MoreCOA reverses decree award of military benefits
May 12, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a portion of a divorce decree awarding some of the husband's military benefits and
housing allowance to his wife because the separation agreement excluded granting the wife any rights to them.
More7th Circuit: No attorney conflict of interest
May 11, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of a drug offender's petition for habeas corpus, ruling his attorney
didn't render ineffective assistance of counsel when he also represented other co-defendants on the same drug charges.
MoreCOA split on which statute of limitation applies
May 7, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals split today in its decision as to whether Indiana's two-year statute of limitations for personal
injury torts or the three-year statute of limitations under the Federal Employers' Liability Act applied in a man's
FELA claim in state court.
MoreCOA rules on first impression lemon-law issue
May 5, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals tackled today an issue of first impression regarding the state's lemon law: Once a consumer
has met the law's repair threshold, he can still file an action under the lemon law even if a subsequent repair fixes
the problem.
MoreCourt orders mandate for full parole hearing
May 4, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of a prisoner's pro se action for a mandate requiring all five parole
board members to vote on his parole eligibility, ruling the prisoner's case was supported by Indiana statute.
MoreOral findings allowed in attorney fee case
May 4, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA Marion Superior Court didn't err when it failed to issue written findings and conclusions pursuant to Indiana Trial
Rule 52 in a dispute over attorney fees, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
MoreCourt: 2-member board could affirm ruling
May 1, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a decision by the National Labor Relations Board that a northern Indiana steel company
must recognize a collective bargaining agreement between the union and the company.
MoreJustices issue sex-offender registration rulings
April 30, 2009
Michael HoskinsConvicted sex offenders who've already served their sentences can't be forced to register for life by a newly enacted
statute, but the Indiana Supreme Court is split on whether that lifetime requirement should be imposed on offenders who are
still registering when the law is changed.
MoreCOA: Man's sentence could be increased
April 30, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals determined the recent ruling by the state's highest court regarding upward sentence revisions
was applicable to a defendant's sentence.
MoreMom's mental ability not reason for termination
April 30, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals declined to write an opinion barring the state from pursuing termination of parental rights of
a "retarded person," as requested by the mother in a termination of parental rights case.
MoreForged agreement presents question of fact
April 29, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA company that forged a former employee's non-compete contract and later sued and settled with another company over that
false document isn't entitled to summary judgment in a new suit brought by the other company after it learned the document
was forged, ruled the Indiana Court of Appeals.
MoreCOA upholds workplace restraining order
April 28, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals today analyzed for the first time the legal parameters required to affirm an order issued to
protect a person under the Workplace Violence Restraining Order Act. The appellate court turned to the Indiana Civil Protection
Order Act to provide context for analyzing cases under the WVROA.
MoreInsurer needs notice of claim to defend it
April 28, 2009
Jennifer NelsonAn insurer can't defend a claim of which it has no knowledge and its duty to defend doesn't begin until it receives
basic notice information to allow it to defend a claim, ruled the Indiana Supreme Court.
MoreCourt rules on ADR sanctions, Open Door Law
April 28, 2009
Michael HoskinsTrial courts can sanction government entities through the state's Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules, but officials
aren't necessarily acting in bad faith if they don't immediately approve mediated agreements to comply with the Indiana
Open Door Law, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
MoreCOA upholds attorney's felony conviction
April 27, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of an attorney's motion to have his prior drunk-driving conviction reduced
to a misdemeanor because the attorney was arrested again for drunk driving before completing his probation.
MoreHigh court reverses termination of mom's rights
April 27, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe majority of Indiana Supreme Court justices ruled in a parental termination case that the evidence presented didn't
clearly show a mother's rights to her son should be terminated. One justice dissented because he believes an appellate
court should defer to the lower court in assessing the facts of a case.
MoreCOA invites high court to revisit Indiana law
April 24, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn a case involving the purchase of a home, Indiana Court of Appeals judges today disagreed as to whether the home sellers
should be granted summary judgment in a fraud suit. The judges unanimously did agree to encourage the Indiana Supreme Court
to re-evaluate a rule that protects a seller from a lawsuit, even if he lies about a property, as long as the prospective
buyer had a reasonable opportunity to inspect the property.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!
So, if I save $100.00 cash per week, from my $500.00 per week paycheck, for 50 years, at which time, I will have saved $260,000.00, the government can raid my home and take my money, just by saying it is drug money! Shouldn't the government, have some kind of evidence of drugs, rather, than just saying we are the government and we will take anything you own, anytime we choose? Tyranny is upon us! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any!