Dissent
Justices split over IHSAA athlete eligibility ruling
December 20, 2010
Jennifer NelsonIndiana’s justices couldn’t agree on whether they should even rule on a case involving an athlete’s eligibility
in high school when the girl is now playing college basketball.
MoreJudges split on construction manager's duty to injured worker
December 14, 2010
Jennifer NelsonAn Indiana Court of Appeals judge dissented from his colleagues’ majority holding, finding their ruling would “fundamentally
alter contracts” dealing with safety on jobsites.
MoreCOA divided on dismissal of OWI charges
December 9, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals split on whether a defendant’s operating while intoxicated charges should have been dismissed
because the charging information didn’t let the man know what vehicle he needed to defend against operating.
MoreJustices split on imprisonment for violating probation
December 9, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe state must prove a probationer accused of violating a term involving a payment by not paying did it recklessly, knowingly
or intentionally. The burden is on the probationer to show an inability to pay, the Indiana Supreme Court decided in an opinion
handed down Wednesday afternoon.
MoreCourt splits on duty owed by independent contractor
December 6, 2010
Jennifer NelsonAn Indiana Court of Appeals judge dissented from his colleagues because he believed the majority’s ruling placed an
“impossible burden” on contractors regarding whether a homebuyer was rightfully on the premises the day she was
injured.
MoreOpinion regarding insurance company considers definition of ‘ever’
November 24, 2010
Rebecca BerfangerAn Indiana Court of Appeals panel was split in an opinion released today that considered the definition of “ever”
on a home insurance application when it came to whether the homeowners insurance coverage was ever “declined, cancelled,
or non-renewed.”
MoreCourt affirms locked glove box search
November 9, 2010
Michael HoskinsWithout a case on point for the Indiana Court of Appeals to follow, the state’s second-highest appellate court has followed
the direction of federal rulings and national precedent on allowing police to search locked glove boxes without a warrant.
MoreCourt divided on invasion of privacy charge
November 8, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals split today as to whether a woman who had an order for protection against her should have been
convicted of invasion of privacy when she spoke to the protected party during a court hearing.
MoreCourt divides over injury claim under insurance policy
October 29, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals split today on whether a couple’s emotional distress claim constitutes “bodily injury”
under their uninsured motorist coverage.
MoreJudges split on court's role in garnishments with pro se debtors
October 28, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals was divided on whether a trial court should assert exemptions in garnishment actions on behalf
of debtors who aren’t represented by counsel.
MoreCourt splits on public intoxication conviction
October 21, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals split today on whether a woman’s conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication
should be reversed because she wasn’t in a public place within the meaning of Indiana Code at the time police stopped
her car.
MoreJustices side with casinos' interests on card counters, problem gambling losses
October 13, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has given state casinos a double win, strengthening their rights by saying they can exclude card
counters and holding that pathological gamblers can’t recover damages stemming from gambling losses as long as the casinos
are following state regulations.
MoreHigh court tackles use-tax issue
October 5, 2010
Elizabeth BrockettThe Supreme Court today ruled that a contribution by a parent corporation to the capital of its subsidiary is not automatically
excluded from Indiana use tax.
MoreJustices disagree on prosecutor's public reprimand
October 5, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has publicly reprimanded a lawyer for what happened to his license when he left private practice
to become a full-time prosecutor in northwest Indiana, but the disciplinary action has split the state’s justices on
whether a more severe punishment was warranted.
MoreHigh court divided on faulty workmanship coverage under CGL policy
October 1, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe high court split on whether an “occurrence” under a commercial general liability policy covers an insured
contract for faulty workmanship of its subcontractor.
MoreMajority: warrantless car search OK under automobile exception
October 1, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Fourth Amendment doesn’t prohibit a warrantless search of an operational car found in a public place if police have
probable cause to believe the car contains evidence of a crime, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
MoreNews Update: Justices rule in favor of casinos
October 1, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has given state casinos a double win, strengthening their rights by saying they can exclude card-counters
and that problem gamblers can’t recover damages stemming from gambling losses as long as the casinos are following state
regulations.
MoreJustices rule in favor of casinos
September 30, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has given casinos a double win today, saying the businesses can ban card-counting and also that
state statute doesn’t allow patrons to recover for losses they might incur because of problem gambling.
MoreVested employer-provided health-insurance premiums are an asset
September 29, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court held that employer-provided health-insurance benefits constitute an asset once they have vested
in a party to the marriage, and addressed for the first time the possible methods of valuing these benefits in marriage dissolution.
This conclusion led one justice to dissent because it disrupts existing dissolution property division law.
MoreMajority orders new requirement for pro se defendants with little guidance
September 29, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThree Indiana Supreme Court justices created a new requirement as an exercise of supervisory powers when it comes to informing
future defendants about the dangers of proceeding pro se, leaving two justices to dissent because the new requirement provides
no guidance as to what trial courts must do or say.
MoreCourt: team-building activity not under insured conditions
September 28, 2010
Elizabeth BrockettThe Indiana Court of Appeals today affirmed summary judgment in favor of an insurance company, noting a soccer team’s
accident while traveling to an activity outside of the trip’s purpose was not covered.
MoreSupreme Court upholds denial of continuance
October 27, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe majority of justices on the Indiana Supreme Court agreed that the trial court didn't abuse its discretion in denying
a married couple's pro se motion to continue after their attorney withdrew six weeks before trial. The dissenting justice
argued because of the complexities of the case, the trial court should have granted the couple's motion.
MoreDissent: new issues can be raised in response
October 9, 2009
Michael HoskinsParties shouldn't be allowed to raise arguments for the first time in response to a rehearing petition before an appellate
court, an Indiana Court of Appeals judge wrote in disagreeing with two of her colleagues.
MoreJudges disagree on when escape occurs
October 7, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals had to decide whether inmates in a jail could be charged with escape if they never left the outer
walls of the facility. The majority affirmed the dismissal of the escape charges against the six inmates, ruling the act was
just a violation of prison rules.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
Longest-practicing female attorney in Indiana has no plans to retire
-
Criminal code and expungement bills signed by governor
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
SCOTUS rules against Indiana farmer in seed patent case
-
Social media sleuths find evidence, but admissibility requires authentication
Court Calendar
-
May 24, 2013 Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Judy Holcomb, Personal Representative of the Estate of Mable Louise Cochran, deceased - 5/24/13
-
May 28, 2013 The Estate of Richard A. Mayer and Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C., v. Lax, Inc., and David Lasco - 5/28/13
-
June 12, 2013 Northern Assurance Company of America v. Thomson, Inc., et al. - 6/12/13
-
June 18, 2013 State of Indiana v. Robert Owens - 6/18/13
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.