Indiana Supreme Court Transfers

Justices put school board member back on Hammond mayoral ballot

April 22, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court late Thursday reversed a decision from a Lake Superior judge and put a nonpartisan school board member back on the ballot for the Hammond mayoral run in the upcoming primary election.
More

Justices dismiss appeal

April 20, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal in an insurance case involving attorney-client privilege because the parties have reached a mediated settlement.
More

Comment time extended on state court rules

April 13, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Hoosier legal community has more time to offer comment on a multitude of state court rules that are being examined for potential revision.
More

Justices accept 4 cases

April 11, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has taken four cases, including one that deals with an insurance dispute over cleanup costs.
More

High court takes 4 cases

March 15, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has granted transfer to four cases, including two dealing with whether a trial court should assert exemptions in garnishment actions on behalf of pro se debtors.
More

High court takes 4 cases

February 28, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court accepted four cases on transfer last week, including a case in which they released an opinion on the day they granted transfer.
More

Emergency transfers by Supreme Court not common

February 16, 2011
Michael Hoskins
What attorneys might consider an emergency legal issue may not draw the same urgency from the Indiana Supreme Court. In fact, it usually doesn’t.
More

High court takes 4 cases

February 14, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted four cases on transfer, including one in which they released an opinion on the matter the same day they granted transfer.
More

Justices accept parental-rights termination case

January 31, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has taken a Marion County case involving the termination of a mother’s parental rights in which the Indiana Court of Appeals took issue with several details in the case.
More

Supreme Court takes public intoxication case

January 17, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court will rule 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. This issue divided the Indiana Court of Appeals, which reversed Brenda Moore’s conviction.
More

Justices take 3 cases

December 20, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has granted transfer to three cases, including one of first impression involving Indiana’s victim-advocate privilege.
More

Justices grant two civil cases, deny 27 appeals

December 13, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted two cases, one involving how public safety officials notify the driving public about icy road conditions and a second case delving into what state law requires when it comes to property tax changing land annexations.
More

Justices take sex offender case

November 22, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to a case filed by a convicted felon who refuses to register as a sex offender for life.
More

Justices take legal-malpractice insurance case

November 17, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to a case in which a legal professional liability insurer claimed it didn’t receive actual notice of claims against the attorney, so the former clients couldn’t collect under the plan.
More

High court vacates transfer order

November 10, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has decided not to take the case of a man who claimed he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
More

High court takes 3 cases

November 2, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court will hear a case in which a dissenting Court of Appeals judge worried that the majority’s finding would head toward a bright-line rule regarding the officer safety exception to the warrant requirement in the context of a car on the side of the road.
More

High court grants 6 transfers

October 25, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court took six cases last week, including two cases of first impression before the Indiana Court of Appeals involving attorney’s fees under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute and the modification of a felony conviction to a misdemeanor.
More

Supreme Court to rule on priority rights on liens

October 4, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court took a case from the Indiana Court of Appeals involving strict foreclosure in which the lower appellate court adopted the reasoning from a federal case to determine priority rights on liens.
More

Supreme Court takes case involving sentencing discrepancy

September 27, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to a case in which a defendant challenged his sentence following his guilty plea to Class B felony burglary and admitting to being a habitual offender.
More

Supreme Court takes 4 cases

September 21, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to four cases Sept. 17, including one involving translated transcripts presented to a jury in a drug case.
More

Justices take 3 cases

September 13, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court accepted transfer of three cases last week, including a case in which the Indiana Court of Appeals lengthened a man’s sentence.
More

Justices take 2 cases

August 31, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted the case in which the Indiana Court of Appeals split in reversing a man’s Class A felony attempted murder conviction.
More

Justices grant 3 transfers

August 3, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court granted three transfers and dismissed one case during its conference late last week, when the justices examined a total 35 cases that were before them for possible transfer.
More

Justices consider juvenile placements

July 21, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court is considering a case where a St. Joseph County juvenile judge has declared unconstitutional three statutes involving child placements, a controversial issue that’s pitted many within the state judiciary against the Indiana Department of Child Services for the past two years.
More

High court grants 2 transfers

June 22, 2010
IL Staff

The Indiana Supreme Court will rule on the issue of whether a defendant has to prove at a probation revocation hearing for failing to support dependents his or her inability to pay the support.

More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It really doesn't matter what the law IS, if law enforcement refuses to take reports (or take them seriously), if courts refuse to allow unrepresented parties to speak (especially in Small Claims, which is supposedly "informal"). It doesn't matter what the law IS, if constituents are unable to make effective contact or receive any meaningful response from their representatives. Two of our pets were unnecessarily killed; court records reflect that I "abandoned" them. Not so; when I was denied one of them (and my possessions, which by court order I was supposed to be able to remove), I went directly to the court. And earlier, when I tried to have the DV PO extended (it expired while the subject was on probation for violating it), the court denied any extension. The result? Same problems, less than eight hours after expiration. Ironic that the county sheriff was charged (and later pleaded to) with intimidation, but none of his officers seemed interested or capable of taking such a report from a private citizen. When I learned from one officer what I needed to do, I forwarded audio and transcript of one occurrence and my call to law enforcement (before the statute of limitations expired) to the prosecutor's office. I didn't even receive an acknowledgement. Earlier, I'd gone in to the prosecutor's office and been told that the officer's (written) report didn't match what I said occurred. Since I had the audio, I can only say that I have very little faith in Indiana government or law enforcement.

  2. One can only wonder whether Mr. Kimmel was paid for his work by Mr. Burgh ... or whether that bill fell to the citizens of Indiana, many of whom cannot afford attorneys for important matters. It really doesn't take a judge(s) to know that "pavement" can be considered a deadly weapon. It only takes a brain and some education or thought. I'm glad to see the conviction was upheld although sorry to see that the asphalt could even be considered "an issue".

  3. In response to bryanjbrown: thank you for your comment. I am familiar with Paul Ogden (and applaud his assistance to Shirley Justice) and have read of Gary Welsh's (strange) death (and have visited his blog on many occasions). I am not familiar with you (yet). I lived in Kosciusko county, where the sheriff was just removed after pleading in what seems a very "sweetheart" deal. Unfortunately, something NEEDS to change since the attorneys won't (en masse) stand up for ethics (rather making a show to please the "rules" and apparently the judges). I read that many attorneys are underemployed. Seems wisdom would be to cull the herd and get rid of the rotting apples in practice and on the bench, for everyone's sake as well as justice. I'd like to file an attorney complaint, but I have little faith in anything (other than the most flagrant and obvious) resulting in action. My own belief is that if this was medicine, there'd be maimed and injured all over and the carnage caused by "the profession" would be difficult to hide. One can dream ... meanwhile, back to figuring out to file a pro se "motion to dismiss" as well as another court required paper that Indiana is so fond of providing NO resources for (unlike many other states, who don't automatically assume that citizens involved in the court process are scumbags) so that maybe I can get the family law attorney - whose work left me with no settlement, no possessions and resulted in the death of two pets (etc ad nauseum) - to stop abusing the proceedings supplemental and small claims rules and using it as a vehicle for harassment and apparently, amusement.

  4. Been on social security sense sept 2011 2massive strokes open heart surgery and serious ovarian cancer and a blood clot in my lung all in 14 months. Got a letter in may saying that i didn't qualify and it was in form like i just applied ,called social security she said it don't make sense and you are still geting a check in june and i did ,now i get a check from my part D asking for payment for july because there will be no money for my membership, call my prescription coverage part D and confirmed no check will be there.went to social security they didn't want to answer whats going on just said i should of never been on it .no one knows where this letter came from was California im in virginia and been here sense my strokes and vcu filed for my disability i was in the hospital when they did it .It's like it was a error . My ,mothers social security was being handled in that office in California my sister was dealing with it and it had my social security number because she died last year and this letter came out of the same office and it came at the same time i got the letter for my mother benefits for death and they had the same date of being typed just one was on the mail Saturday and one on Monday. . I think it's a mistake and it should been fixed instead there just getting rid of me .i never got a formal letter saying when i was being tsken off.

  5. Employers should not have racially discriminating mind set. It has huge impact on the society what the big players do or don't do in the industry. Background check is conducted just to verify whether information provided by the prospective employee is correct or not. It doesn't have any direct combination with the rejection of the employees. If there is rejection, there should be something effective and full-proof things on the table that may keep the company or the people associated with it in jeopardy.

ADVERTISEMENT