Judge Nancy H. Vaidik
Court clarifies continuing objection procedure
April 20, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIf a trial court grants a continuing objection, counsel doesn't have to object each time the class of evidence is subsequently
offered, but if the trial court doesn't specifically grant the right to a continuing objection, counsel must object to
the evidence as it is offered in order to preserve the issue on appeal, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today.
MoreText messages must be separately authenticated
March 31, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn a matter of first impression, the Indiana Court of Appeals determined text messages are subject to separate authentication
before being admitted into evidence, much like the authentication process that data saved in a computer must undergo before
being admitted.
MoreCOA affirms ruling in 'unusual' termination case
March 23, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn an unusual case on appeal in which a mother's parental rights were terminated to only one of her five children during
a termination hearing, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the decision due to the circumstances of the case.
MoreJudges differ in stipulation matter
January 27, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed on whether a defendant pleaded guilty to the enhancement of his auto
theft conviction based on his previous conviction for a similar crime.
MoreJudges disagree on intent issue in rape trial
January 1, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed as to whether a defendant in a rape case put his intent at issue during
trial by attempting to show his victim consented to sex with him.
MoreDad not in contempt for failure to pay full support
October 29, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals agreed a man was not in contempt for failing to pay child support ordered by a Florida court
even though the Indiana trial court enforced his obligation for less than the amount ordered in Florida.
MoreCOA uses opinion to clarify sentence claims
October 3, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals used a defendant's appeal today to clarify that inappropriate sentence claims and abuse of
discretion claims are to be analyzed separately.
MoreAmendment trumps high court ruling
September 30, 2008
Jennifer NelsonAddressing the issue for the first time since the legislature amended the state's Workers' Compensation Act in 2006,
the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today the amendment overrules an earlier Indiana Supreme Court decision that placed the
burden of proof on employers in cases involving "neutral risk" incidents.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Court Calendar
-
May 22, 2013 Floyd Weddle v. State of Indiana - 5/22/13
-
May 24, 2013 Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Judy Holcomb, Personal Representative of the Estate of Mable Louise Cochran, deceased - 5/24/13
-
May 28, 2013 The Estate of Richard A. Mayer and Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C., v. Lax, Inc., and David Lasco - 5/28/13
-
June 12, 2013 Northern Assurance Company of America v. Thomson, Inc., et al. - 6/12/13
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.
Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.
In regards to bill's comment about trusting the cover meant. We can trust them about as much as we can trust attorneys'.
This is disturbing to learn...