Indiana Supreme Court

E-Ticket program wins 2 awards

September 30, 2009
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court's electronic ticketing program has won awards from two safety associations.
More

Court split on if lab tech must testify

September 25, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The state's highest court was split in its ruling on whether the failure of a lab technician who processed DNA evidence to testify at a man's trial violated his Sixth Amendment rights.
More

High court grants transfer Thursday

September 25, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer Thursday to a case questioning whether the Indiana Department of Transportation is liable for the death of an employee of an independent contractor working on a highway project.
More

Justice praises court-technology support

September 24, 2009
IL Staff
Indiana Supreme Court Justice Frank Sullivan Jr. praised Gov. Mitch Daniels' administration's support for improved court technology during a speech Wednesday in Denver. Justice Sullivan addressed a plenary session at the National Court Technology Conference, which is sponsored by the National Center for State Courts.
More

Supreme Court amends more rules

September 22, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has amended various rules of court, including admission and disciplinary, alternative dispute resolution, and appellate procedure rules.
More

Clinic argues for man's innocence

September 16, 2009
Michael Hoskins
the Indiana Supreme Court is considering whether to accept a post-conviction case on an issue some say is an important question of law relating to wrongful convictions.
More

Reforms urged to prevent mistakes

September 16, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Indiana explores what revisions to make to its criminal justice system.
More

Court adopts police interrogation rule

September 15, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Following the model of more than a dozen other states, the Indiana Supreme Court has added a new Rule of Evidence to require that certain statements be recorded before they can be entered into evidence.
More

Changes coming to Child Support Rules

September 15, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
An order issued by the Indiana Supreme Court today amending the state's Child Support Rules and Guidelines caused two justices to dissent in part over worries a change may alter precedent.
More

Film, educational events mark Constitution Day

September 15, 2009
IL StaffMore

Supreme Court grants 6 transfers

September 14, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted six transfers Sept. 11, including a case of first impression involving a suit filed by a pathological gambler against a riverboat casino.
More

Justices rule in favor of cup manufacturers

September 8, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The manufacturer defendants in a suit claiming defects in their measuring cup caused the death of a 9-year-old boy are entitled to summary judgment, the Indiana Supreme Court affirmed today.
More

High court takes workers' compensation case

September 8, 2009
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer Thursday to case involving part of the worker's compensation statute that the Indiana Court of Appeals called "somewhat obscure."
More

Court rules on transfer to California court

September 3, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's decision to relinquish its jurisdiction over child support matters to a California trial court. In its opinion, the high court examined the interplay between the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act and the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.
More

High court rules on post-judgment interest

September 2, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to a case in order to clarify precedents on post-judgment interest in dissolution cases. The high court held that the dissolution statutes give a court the option to either assess interest or not in the course of fashioning a just division of assets.
More

CJ: Most players in appeals acting responsibly

August 26, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana chief justice said in an order that he would "smack down" judicial overreaching or overspending.
More

Justices: Appeal not available after guilty plea

August 25, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
A majority of Indiana Supreme Court justices agreed a man who pleaded guilty couldn't appeal the denial of his pre-trial motion to suppress. Yet one justice believed the plea agreement should have been honored according to its terms, which included reserving the right to object to the denial of the motion to suppress.
More

Justices deny sex offender park ban case

August 21, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has declined after nine months to accept a case asking whether registered sex offenders can be banned from parks and recreational areas.
More

Supreme Court grants 3 transfers

August 21, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer this week to three cases, including a first impression case involving whether someone who has drugs within 1,000 feet of a youth program center run in a church can have their conviction enhanced.
More

Order affirms delinquent fee waivers

August 19, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court issued an administrative order Tuesday allowing the executive secretary of the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission and the executive director of the Indiana Commission on Continuing Legal Education to continue to grant waivers to attorneys for delinquent fees and reinstatement fees assessed pursuant to Admission & Discipline Rules 23(21) and 29(7).
More

Chief justices to discuss court issues

August 19, 2009
IL Staff
Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard and other jurists from the Midwest will talk about important issues affecting their respective courts during a panel discussion Sept. 9 at Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis.
More

Court appoints 3 to Disciplinary Commission

August 17, 2009
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court announced today two new appointments to the Disciplinary Commission and the reappointment of one member.
More

Transfer granted to sentencing appeal

August 14, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer this week to case in which a defendant believed the trial court abused its discretion in referring to his Level of Service Inventory-Revised and Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory scores.
More

Court: Murderer not eligible for parole

July 31, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled that a man serving two life sentences for his 1975 murder convictions isn't eligible to seek parole under the laws in effect at the time the murders took place, but could seek clemency though the Indiana Parole Board.
More

Law students complete diversity program

July 31, 2009
IL Staff
A program implemented by the state to help minority, low income, or educationally disadvantaged college graduates who will attend law school and plan to practice in Indiana has wrapped up its annual event.
More
Page  << 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 >> pager
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT