Indiana Court of Appeals

Man’s additional charges should have been dismissed

September 5, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Whitley Superior Court should have granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss two operating while intoxicated charges because the charges came after he pleaded guilty to two other charges relating to the same initial traffic stop.
More

Previous testimony allowed in murder trial

September 4, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A witness’s testimony from a man’s murder trial and the deposition testimony of another unavailable witness were correctly allowed at the man’s second murder trial, the Indiana Court of Appeals held Tuesday.
More

COA orders judge grant motion for bail bond reduction

September 4, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Even though the severity of the 13 charges against a Knox County man for his role in several home invasions supports setting his bond at $25,000 cash only, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court should have allowed him to post a percentage of that to bond out.
More

Judges disagree over whether car ad implied drivability

September 4, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was divided on whether an Indianapolis car dealership was entitled to summary judgment on a buyer’s lawsuit that made Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act, Crime Victims Relief Act, and fraud claims.
More

Worker’s Compensation Act doesn’t give board ability to decide contract construction issue

September 4, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that a Hamilton Superior Judge erred in granting an injured worker’s motion to dismiss a company’s action on whether it was liable to pay workers’ compensation to the injured man, who worked for another company.
More

Convicted sex offender appeals requirement to register in Indiana

September 4, 2012
IL Staff
A Massachusetts man who pleaded guilty to rape and abuse of a child in that state in 1984 will argue before the Indiana Court of Appeals Wednesday that he should not have to register in Indiana, where he now lives.
More

Suit challenging construction of asphalt plant timely filed

August 31, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals determined that the Jeffersonville director of planning and zoning and the city building commissioner are public officers under Indiana Code 34-11-2-6. The judges discovered there is no state law defining public officer under this statute.
More

Teen loses on appeal negligence suit filed for softball injury

August 31, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A Wabash County YMCA proved it was entitled to summary judgment on a negligence claim filed by a 17-year-old teen injured while sliding into a base during a softball game on property owned by the YMCA, the Indiana Court of Appeals held.
More

Woman fails to prove animal fighting statute is unconstitutionally vague

August 31, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A Marion County woman failed to carry her “heavy burden” of proving that Indiana Code 35-46-3-10, which governs dog fights, is unconstitutionally vague, the Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
More

Judges: employee discharged for just cause

August 31, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the finding by an administrative law judge and the Indiana Department of Workforce Development that an employee of a funeral home was fired for just cause.
More

DCS admits petition flawed; COA orders more proceedings

August 31, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Gibson Circuit Court committed fundamental error in terminating the parental rights of a mother and father over their young child, the Indiana Court of Appeals held Friday. The Department of Child Services admitted that it failed to comply with statute when filing the petition to terminate their parental rights.
More

Case arising out of molestation not reported by DCS divides court

August 30, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A lawsuit brought by parents against the Department of Child Services and Evansville Police Department for not informing them of their daughter’s molestation led each judge on the Court of Appeals panel to write his or her own opinion. The only thing the judges agreed on is that the police department is not a proper party to the case.
More

Trial court erred in land survey dispute

August 30, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Although a Starke Circuit Court correctly rejected a legal survey performed on land owned by a trust, the special judge did err by imposing two prior surveys to establish boundary lines of the property, the Indiana Court of Appeals held.
More

Mining company an insured under contractor’s policy

August 30, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The mining company that hired a truck company as a contractor is considered an insured under the truck company’s insurance policy with regards to an injured trucking employee, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
More

Judges order new trial due to counsel’s deficient performance

August 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A Marion County man was prejudiced by his counsel’s error of not timely filing a request for a jury trial, so the Indiana Court of Appeals ordered a new trial on his Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement conviction.
More

Denial of summary judgment upheld over questions of car ownership

August 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The insurer of a car dealership is not entitled to summary judgment because there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the dealership or the son of an employee who purchased a car from the dealership owned the car at the time the son hit a bicyclist.
More

Medical malpractice caps challenged in Indiana, fall elsewhere

August 29, 2012
Dave Stafford
Medical malpractice caps are unconstitutional in Missouri. And in Illinois and Georgia. They might be in Indiana, too, if the justices of the Supreme Court grant Timothy Plank the day in court his attorneys say he is entitled to.
More

Court of Appeals finds 2006 statute does apply to 2001 violation

August 28, 2012
Marilyn Odendahl
The Indiana Court of Appeals rejected a defendant’s ex post facto argument and affirmed a trial court’s decision to convict him of committing a sex offender residency offense.
More

COA affirms its reversal of trial court in land-use case

August 28, 2012
Dave Stafford
Property owners on a northwestern Indiana lake who argued their land was unconstitutionally taken lost their rehearing before the Indiana Court of Appeals.
More

In environmental suit, court properly vacated ruling for Bloomington dry cleaner

August 28, 2012
Dave Stafford
A Bloomington dry cleaner lost his appeal of a court’s order that vacated a prior ruling granting partial summary judgment in the businessman’s favor.
More

Student’s delinquency adjudication involving in-school incident reversed

August 28, 2012
Dave Stafford
A Ben Davis High School student won an appeal of his adjudication as a delinquent Tuesday after the Court of Appeals held the circumstances for which he was adjudicated did not meet the equivalent of Class D felony resisting law enforcement.
More

Court of Appeals finds insurer’s intent is not clear in policy language

August 28, 2012
Marilyn Odendahl
Finding language in an insurance policy to be ambiguous, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a trial court’s entry of summary judgment for an insurance company.
More

Inmate loses challenge to law ending certain educational funding

August 28, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The 2011 amendment that stopped state funding of postsecondary education programs in correctional facilities for convicted felons who are confined in a penal facility is not an ex post facto law nor does it violate an inmate’s constitutional rights, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
More

Man’s convictions affirmed, but court orders record set straight

August 28, 2012
Dave Stafford
An Indianapolis man lost his criminal appeal Tuesday, but the Indiana Court of Appeals ordered the trial court to correct an abstract of judgment that incorrectly recorded a felony conviction.
More

Appeals court affirms order for expert witness to indemnify past employer

August 28, 2012
Dave Stafford
An expert for a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case who was ordered to execute a release indemnifying a former employer must do so, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.
More
Page  << 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Falk said “At this point, at this minute, we’ll savor this particular victory.” “It certainly is a historic week on this front,” Cockrum said. “What a delight ... “Happy Independence Day to the women of the state of Indiana,” WOW. So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)

  2. congratulations on such balanced journalism; I also love how fetus disposal affects women's health protection, as covered by Roe...

  3. It truly sickens me every time a case is compared to mine. The Indiana Supreme Court upheld my convictions based on a finding of “hidden threats.” The term “hidden threat” never appeared until the opinion in Brewington so I had no way of knowing I was on trial for making hidden threats because Dearborn County Prosecutor F Aaron Negangard argued the First Amendment didn't protect lies. Negangard convened a grand jury to investigate me for making “over the top” and “unsubstantiated” statements about court officials, not hidden threats of violence. My indictments and convictions were so vague, the Indiana Court of Appeals made no mention of hidden threats when they upheld my convictions. Despite my public defender’s closing arguments stating he was unsure of exactly what conduct the prosecution deemed to be unlawful, Rush found that my lawyer’s trial strategy waived my right to the fundamental error of being tried for criminal defamation because my lawyer employed a strategy that attempted to take advantage of Negangard's unconstitutional criminal defamation prosecution against me. Rush’s opinion stated the prosecution argued two grounds for conviction one constitutional and one not, however the constitutional true threat “argument” consistently of only a blanket reading of subsection 1 of the intimidation statute during closing arguments, making it impossible to build any kind of defense. Of course intent was impossible for my attorney to argue because my attorney, Rush County Chief Public Defender Bryan Barrett refused to meet with me prior to trial. The record is littered with examples of where I made my concerns known to the trial judge that I didn’t know the charges against me, I did not have access to evidence, all while my public defender refused to meet with me. Special Judge Brian Hill, from Rush Superior Court, refused to address the issue with my public defender and marched me to trial without access to evidence or an understanding of the indictments against me. Just recently the Indiana Public Access Counselor found that four over four years Judge Hill has erroneously denied access to the grand jury audio from my case, the most likely reason being the transcription of the grand jury proceedings omitted portions of the official audio record. The bottom line is any intimidation case involves an action or statement that is debatably a threat of physical violence. There were no such statements in my case. The Indiana Supreme Court took partial statements I made over a period of 41 months and literally connected them with dots… to give the appearance that the statements were made within the same timeframe and then claimed a person similarly situated would find the statements intimidating while intentionally leaving out surrounding contextual factors. Even holding the similarly situated test was to be used in my case, the prosecution argued that the only intent of my public writings was to subject the “victims” to ridicule and hatred so a similarly situated jury instruction wouldn't even have applied in my case. Chief Justice Rush wrote the opinion while Rush continued to sit on a committee with one of the alleged victims in my trial and one of the judges in my divorce, just as she'd done for the previous 7+ years. All of this information, including the recent PAC opinion against the Dearborn Superior Court II can be found on my blog www.danbrewington.blogspot.com.

  4. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  5. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

ADVERTISEMENT