Judge Cale J. Bradford
COA: ‘Appalling character’ of deadbeat dad merits 10-year sentence
January 15, 2013
Dave StaffordAn Elkhart County father whose child support arrearage neared $57,000 lost his second appeal of a case that already has gone
to the Indiana Supreme Court.
MoreMan's conviction hinges on 'induce' definition
September 20, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals had to determine how to interpret the term “induce” related to a man’s contributing
to the delinquency of a minor case and upheld his conviction based on the term’s dictionary definition.
MoreDefense attorneys lose appeal for compensation
August 29, 2011
Michael HoskinsTwo private defense lawyers in Marion County failed to convince the Indiana Court of Appeals that they should be retroactively
appointed by the Marion County Public Defender Agency and compensated for their legal work on a case that has an intricate
maze of attorney representation over the course of five years.
MoreCOA: man doesn't have to testify for self-defense instruction
June 2, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals ordered a new trial for a man convicted of murder because the trial court erred by refusing to
instruct the jury on self-defense without the defendant’s testimony.
MoreInsurer not entitled to rescind home insurance policy
May 26, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe failure to disclose true value in a real estate insurance context doesn’t give rise to a rescission claim, the Indiana
Court of Appeals held in a case of first impression.
MoreJudges split on stalking conviction
April 29, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals was divided Friday in reversing a man’s conviction of stalking. The decision hinged on
their interpretations of the term “repeated” in Indiana’s anti-stalking laws.
MoreAppellate court to visit Wabash for arguments
April 28, 2011
IL StaffThe Indiana Court of Appeals travels to Wabash Friday to hear arguments in an insurance case.
MoreJudge argues state must prove actual endangerment
April 18, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals split Monday regarding a man’s conviction of misdemeanor operating while intoxicated, with
Judge Terry Crone arguing the statute requires the state to prove actual endangerment of the driver or others, not just the
possibility of it.
MoreCourt: DNR case can proceed despite 11-year delay
March 31, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Court of Appeals has looked past a trial rule calling for diligent prosecution of claims, finding that a state
Department of Natural Resources land ownership dispute can proceed despite an 11-year delay in prosecuting because it’s
of great public importance and should be decided on the merits.
MoreAppeals court to hear arguments at Indy high school
March 14, 2011
IL StaffThe Indiana Court of Appeals will visit Pike High School in Indianapolis this week to hear arguments in a case in which a
man appeals his drug dealing conviction.
MoreCOA reverses marijuana conviction based on intent
March 8, 2011
Rebecca BerfangerThe majority of an Indiana Court of Appeals panel today reversed a conviction of marijuana possession after the defendant
contended there was insufficient evidence that she constructively possessed the drug.
MoreCOA adopts common-sense rule on providing insurance policies
March 1, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Court of Appeals has adopted a common-sense rule many other courts throughout the country have implemented, in
requiring insurers to provide copies of their insurance policies to the insured if they ask for one following a loss.
MoreCOA reverses father's visitation of adopted daughter
February 7, 2011
Jennifer NelsonAlthough one Indiana Court of Appeals judge concurred that a biological father’s petition granting visitation with his
daughter should be reversed, he urged legislators and the Indiana Supreme Court to reconsider the issues raised in this case
to “avoid equally unjust results in future cases.”
MoreCOA: Man has exhausted compensation benefits
January 31, 2011
Jennifer NelsonAn Indiana statute is ambiguous as to whether a person who has exhausted his actual worker’s compensation benefits prior
to 500 weeks is eligible to receive benefits from the Second Injury Fund starting on the date of the exhaustion of the actual
benefits, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded today.
MoreUnsuccessful Medicaid applicants aren't entitled to in-person hearing
December 16, 2010
Jennifer NelsonPeople whose applications have been denied for Medicaid disability benefits do not have a constitutional right to an in-person
administrative hearing, the Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled.
MoreCourt divided on invasion of privacy charge
November 8, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals split today as to whether a woman who had an order for protection against her should have been
convicted of invasion of privacy when she spoke to the protected party during a court hearing.
MoreAll judges up for retention to stay on bench
November 3, 2010
IL StaffThe 11 judges up for retention this year – including five on the Indiana Court of Appeals – will remain on the
bench.
MoreState bar releases results of COA retention survey
October 13, 2010
IL StaffIf the results of the Indiana State Bar Association’s 2010 Judicial Retention Poll are any indicator of next month’s
election, then the five Indiana Court of Appeals judges up for a vote will be easily retained.
More5 Court of Appeals judges up for retention
October 13, 2010
Michael HoskinsOne third of the Indiana Court of Appeals judges face a retention vote this year. Read the judges’ answers to questions
posed by Indiana Lawyer.
MoreCOA reverses judgment on contract-rescission claim against lottery
September 7, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals will allow lottery scratch-off game players’ claim of contract rescission against the state’s
lottery commission to proceed to trial, but the court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the lottery on the other claims
filed by the players in a class-action suit.
MoreCourt: insufficient notice bars tort claim
August 3, 2010
Elizabeth BrockettThe Indiana Court of Appeals today ruled that insufficient notice barred a complaint for damages in a case involving a condominium
complex and its various longtime issues.
MoreCOA extends judicial immunity to arbitrators
August 3, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a real estate broker’s action to vacate an arbitration award
to another broker. In doing so, the appellate court extended judicial and quasi-judicial immunity to arbitrators and their
sponsors.
MoreState, federal double-jeopardy challenge fails
July 20, 2010
Elizabeth BrockettA man’s claims of federal and state double-jeopardy violations were rejected today by the Indiana Court of Appeals,
which affirmed the trial court in a case involving multiple child pornography videos.
MoreAppeals court rules on corporate subsidiaries case
June 25, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled against a Bluffton electric company, finding that corporations can’t simply create
subsidiaries internally and declare them separate entities in order to avoid paying higher tax rates under state unemployment
compensation law.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!
So, if I save $100.00 cash per week, from my $500.00 per week paycheck, for 50 years, at which time, I will have saved $260,000.00, the government can raid my home and take my money, just by saying it is drug money! Shouldn't the government, have some kind of evidence of drugs, rather, than just saying we are the government and we will take anything you own, anytime we choose? Tyranny is upon us! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any!