September 11, 2009
Jennifer NelsonEven though a police officer didn't see a driver commit any traffic infractions before pulling him over, the officer could
stop the car because he believed the driver might have been injured or impaired, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed today.
More
September 11, 2009
Jennifer NelsonBecause an attorney acting pro se in a mortgage suit didn't include a statement in his general denial that the denial
was truthful and made under penalty for perjury, he failed to deny under oath the execution of the note, the Indiana Court
of Appeals ruled today.
More
September 10, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals had to decide for the first time whether a company owes a continuing fiduciary duty to a former
shareholder or member to accurately report the company's fiscal results to the IRS for a year in which the former member
held stock or was still a member of the limited liability company.
More
September 10, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a default judgment in favor of an Indiana attorney because an Illinois attorney demonstrated
"contumacious disregard" for a trial court's orders.
More
September 9, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed that an attorney was ineffective because the majority found the attorney
told her client he "should" win the case whereas one judge pointed out in the record the attorney admitted to telling
the client he "would" win.
More
September 9, 2009
Jennifer NelsonBecause consent is not a defense to battery when a deadly weapon is used, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a man's
convictions of felony and misdemeanor battery on his girlfriend after branding her with a hot knife and hitting her with a
cord.
More
September 8, 2009
Jennifer NelsonAn Indiana Court of Appeals judge dissented from his colleagues today in a ruling involving the ownership of certain joint
accounts because he believed an Indiana Supreme Court decision was binding in the case.
More
September 2, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe participation of alternate jurors in discussions of evidence during recesses from trial, as allowed under Indiana Jury
Rule 20(a)(8), doesn't violate Indiana statute that prevents alternates from participating in deliberations. The Indiana
Court of Appeals ruled on the matter for the first time today.
More
September 2, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a man's convictions because the trial court failed to adequately ascertain whether
he was indigent for purposes of court-appointed counsel.
More
August 31, 2009
Jennifer NelsonOn remand from the Supreme Court of the United States to reconsider under a recent ruling, the Indiana Court of Appeals reaffirmed
the forfeiture of a woman's car following the arrest of her son for driving while suspended. One judge dissented because
she believes the search of the vehicle was unreasonable in light of the recent ruling.
More
August 31, 2009
Jennifer NelsonAn Allen Superior Court correctly ruled that a travel plaza had a vested right to develop its plans under an original zoning
ordinance, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed today.
More
August 28, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIndiana Court of Appeals judges unanimously agreed today that a defendant's petition for expungement of his arrest shouldn't
have been denied by the trial court, but they disagreed as to what should happen on remand.
More
August 28, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe trial court was correct in interpreting the state's habitual offender statute to include an instant conviction as
one of the "unrelated" convictions referred to in the statute, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today.
More
August 26, 2009
Jennifer NelsonDespite modifications to a mycelium-drying business located adjacent to a farmhouse, the business is still a nuisance that
deprives the homeowners from the free use and enjoyment of their property, ruled the Indiana Court of Appeals.
More
August 25, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn a modification of physical custody case, the Indiana Court of Appeals remanded for further proceedings because the trial
court was required to hear evidence on and consider all of the factors listed in Indiana Code Section 31-17-2.2-1(b).
More
August 21, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA widow's request for workers' compensation benefits of her deceased husband can't be granted because his death at work was
caused by a knowingly self-inflicted injury, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today. The woman failed to satisfy the chain
of causation test in trying to prove an initial work-related event led to her husband's death.
More
August 18, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIndiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed over whether two doctors' expert witness testimony in a medical malpractice
case used hypothetical language that couldn't raise a genuine issue of fact.
More
August 17, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe state's Ethics Commission correctly concluded an Indiana Department of Environmental Management employee violated
a provision of the ethics code when he bought gas with a state-issued credit card at a gas station he partly owned.
More
August 17, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA Marion Superior trial court should have granted a woman's motion to continue the day of her bench trial because she
had a constitutional right to present a defense to support her involuntary intoxication argument, the Indiana Court of Appeals
decided today.
More
August 14, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIndiana Court of Appeals judges had differing opinions as to whether the trial court was required to enter findings during
a hearing in which a mother's parenting time was restricted.
More
August 12, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe state's refusal to waive jury trials in one Marion Superior Court doesn't violate the constitutional rights of
the mentally ill defendants who appear in that court, ruled the Indiana Court of Appeals.
More
August 12, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIndiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed today whether a company should be entitled to damages when it lowered its bid for
work at a state-run hospital based on fraudulent information from another bidder.
More
August 12, 2009
IL StaffThe Indiana Court of Appeals will hear arguments tomorrow in a negligence suit filed by parents after their infant died while
sleeping on a couch with his mother.
More
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.
Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.