Indiana Supreme Court

Dickson makes pitch for Odyssey funding

January 23, 2013
Dave Stafford
Procuring money to expand the Odyssey case management system is “one of our most urgent priorities,” Indiana Chief Justice Brent Dickson told the General Assembly on Wednesday in his first State of the Judiciary address.
More

Democrats' walkout leads to another 'fines' mess

January 16, 2013
Dave Stafford
Before the Indiana General Assembly convened Jan. 7, some unfinished business was debated in the Statehouse: whether Republican House leaders went too far in seizing fines from Democrats who walked out of the Legislature in 2011 and 2012.
More

Justices take 5 cases

January 15, 2013
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Supreme Court will weigh whether a student who resisted being handcuffed by a school resource officer merits adjudication as a delinquent for the equivalent of Class D felony resisting law enforcement.
More

Plank failed to preserve claim med mal cap is unconstitutional

January 15, 2013
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court unanimously ruled Tuesday that Timothy Plank, who filed a medical malpractice complaint following the death of his wife in 2001, forfeited his opportunity to conduct an evidentiary hearing challenging the constitutionality of the Medical Malpractice Act.
More

Dickson to deliver first State of the Judiciary

January 11, 2013
IL Staff
Chief Justice Brent Dickson will deliver his first State of the Judiciary address to the Indiana General Assembly at 2 p.m. EST on Jan. 23.
More

AG asks Supreme Court to review Gingerich conviction

January 11, 2013
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversal of an adult murder conspiracy conviction of a then-12-year-old should be reviewed by the state Supreme Court, Attorney General Greg Zoeller said in a statement late Thursday.
More

Justices find man not required to register for life as sex offender

January 10, 2013
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court held Thursday that based on the facts of a Lake County man’s case, a 2006 amendment requiring him to register for life as a sex offender violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of the Indiana Constitution. The amendment took effect after Andre Gonzalez fully served his sentence and during the 10-year period of his required registration.
More

Justices adopt changes to parenting time guidelines

January 10, 2013
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has issued a 33-page order that spells out the changes to the state’s parenting time rule and guidelines. The amendments take effect March 1, 2013.
More

Texas Roadhouse fire suit among 4 justices take

January 8, 2013
Dave Stafford
A lawsuit over liability for a fire that destroyed an Indianapolis steakhouse because hydrants were frozen and unusable will proceed to the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Dickson encourages compromise on House Democrat fines suit

January 3, 2013
Dave Stafford
Indiana Chief Justice Brent Dickson implored litigants to resolve a lawsuit over the collection of fines levied on House Democrats who walked out of the Legislature in 2011 and 2012.
More

Justices decide to allow big exhibit at arguments

January 2, 2013
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Supreme Court has reversed an order it issued Monday that prevented an appellant from bringing in a utility truck bucket to arguments scheduled Thursday.
More

2012 Year in Review

January 2, 2013
IL Staff
2012 was another busy year for the legal community. We welcomed new justices and a new chief justice, witnessed the beginnings of the state’s fifth law school, and saw local stories garner national and international attention. Here’s a look back at the top news stories from last year.
More

Rush robing completes Supreme Court transition

January 2, 2013
Dave Stafford
Justice Loretta Rush formally was robed the 108th justice of the Indiana Supreme Court on Dec. 28, the third member of the five-member court appointed by Gov. Mitch Daniels.
More

Rush robing completes Supreme Court transition

December 28, 2012
Dave Stafford
Justice Loretta Rush formally was robed the 108th justice of the Indiana Supreme Court on Friday, the third member of the five-member court appointed by Gov. Mitch Daniels.
More

Supreme Court denies 17 cases for transfer

December 27, 2012
IL Staff
Last week, the Indiana Supreme Court only took one case on transfer, which it ruled on Dec. 19. The justices declined to take 17 other cases.
More

Snow forces court, office closures

December 26, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Many people in Indiana may be enjoying an extra-long Christmas vacation thanks to blizzard-like conditions in parts of the state. Heavy snow and high winds have led to closures, including Indiana’s appellate courts.
More

Supreme Court denies Star appeal in online commenter case

December 21, 2012
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday denied transfer in The Indianapolis Star’s appeal of an order that it identify a person who posted an anonymous online comment that has been included in a defamation suit.
More

Justices: summary judgment inappropriate on some claims in contaminated waste suit

December 19, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has affirmed in part and reversed in part the grant of summary judgment to various defendants involved in a landowner’s lawsuit seeking damages after a steel fabrication company deposited solid waste onto his property.
More

Hospital wins on uninsured patients’ appeal of rates charged

December 19, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled in favor of a hospital’s motion to dismiss a complaint brought by uninsured patients regarding the rates charged by the hospital, finding the patients’ complaint failed to state facts on which the trial court could have granted relief.
More

Rush robing ceremony set

December 19, 2012
IL Staff
Indiana Supreme Court Justice Loretta Rush’s formal robing ceremony will take place at 10 a.m. Friday, Dec. 28 in the Supreme Court Courtroom at the Statehouse.
More

2012 DTCI Amicus Report

December 19, 2012
From DTCI
In 2012, the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana’s Amicus Committee participated, or is participating, in four interesting appeals, each involving support for parties seeking transfer to the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

The Star asks Supreme Court to review order to name online commenter

December 18, 2012
Dave Stafford
The Indianapolis Star has asked the Indiana Supreme Court to hear its appeal of an order that it identify an anonymous commenter who posted messages on its website that became part of a defamation suit.
More

Justices order modification of sentence of convicted child caseworker to comply with plea agreement

December 17, 2012
Dave Stafford
A former child protective services caseworker convicted of sex crimes in Hamilton and Elkhart counties should have his sentence modified to comport with his plea agreement, the Indiana Supreme Court ordered.
More

Justices take 6 cases, reject 26

December 17, 2012
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer in six of 32 cases reviewed in the week ending Dec. 14, according to the transfer disposition list posted Monday on the court website.
More

Justices issue 4 opinions tackling prejudgment interest

December 13, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
In four opinions dealing with the award of prejudgment interest under the Tort Prejudgment Interest Statute, the Indiana Supreme Court found Wednesday, among other things, that the TPIS applies to an action by an insured against an insurer to recover benefits under the insured’s underinsured motorist policy.
More
Page  << 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT