Justice Brent E. Dickson
Justices: sentence shouldn't have been upped on appeal
December 10, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court has ordered that a man’s sentence be reduced after the lower appellate court increased it
on appeal.
MoreJustices split on imprisonment for violating probation
December 9, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe state must prove a probationer accused of violating a term involving a payment by not paying did it recklessly, knowingly
or intentionally. The burden is on the probationer to show an inability to pay, the Indiana Supreme Court decided in an opinion
handed down Wednesday afternoon.
MoreJustices order new trial to determine fault in Ford rollover suit
October 14, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court has reversed the allocation of fault in a wrongful death action against Ford Motor Co. and other
defendants, finding the evidence didn’t support allocating fault to the manufacturer of the seatbelt assembly and a
nonparty. The high court was also faced with the challenge of allocating fault among the remaining parties.
MoreJustices side with casinos' interests on card counters, problem gambling losses
October 13, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has given state casinos a double win, strengthening their rights by saying they can exclude card
counters and holding that pathological gamblers can’t recover damages stemming from gambling losses as long as the casinos
are following state regulations.
MoreNews Update: Justices rule in favor of casinos
October 1, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has given state casinos a double win, strengthening their rights by saying they can exclude card-counters
and that problem gamblers can’t recover damages stemming from gambling losses as long as the casinos are following state
regulations.
MoreJustices rule in favor of casinos
September 30, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has given casinos a double win today, saying the businesses can ban card-counting and also that
state statute doesn’t allow patrons to recover for losses they might incur because of problem gambling.
MoreHigh court orders new murder trial
September 30, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court overturned a Fulton County man’s murder sentence because a detective continued with the interview
even after the man invoked his right to counsel several times.
MoreVested employer-provided health-insurance premiums are an asset
September 29, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court held that employer-provided health-insurance benefits constitute an asset once they have vested
in a party to the marriage, and addressed for the first time the possible methods of valuing these benefits in marriage dissolution.
This conclusion led one justice to dissent because it disrupts existing dissolution property division law.
MoreAppellate court openings spark discussion about experience
July 7, 2010
Michael HoskinsWhether someone has worn a black robe before joining an appellate court is a discussion that often surfaces whenever one of
those judiciary posts opens in either the state or federal system.
MoreIndiana Supreme Court review analyzes trends, voting patterns
July 7, 2010
Michael HoskinsEvery summer, an attorney-authored review analyzes and highlights the Indiana Supreme Court’s activity during the past
year. But only rarely does that report come at a time when the state’s highest court is seeing change.
MoreJustices: statements fall within qualified privilege
June 18, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of a company and its employee in a defamation suit because qualified
privilege precludes the defamation action.
MoreDecision resolves conflicting appellate rulings
March 3, 2010
Jennifer NelsonAn offense of attempted dissemination of matter harmful to minors can be committed when a defendant attempts to transmit prohibited
matter by the Internet to an adult police detective posing as a minor, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
MoreJustices decide statute, court rule issue
January 15, 2010
Michael HoskinsEven if a court rule is no longer relevant and an underlying state statute has been removed from the books, the Indiana Supreme
Court says it still applies and must be followed until the justices revisit it themselves or say otherwise.
MoreJustices split on transfer of noncompete case
December 21, 2009
Michael HoskinsTwo Indiana Supreme Court justices disagreed with their colleagues in not accepting an appeal, finding that a ruling from
the state's intermediate appellate court muddled caselaw on medical business and noncompete agreements, and significantly
jeopardizes the public's access to medical care.
MoreReimbursement to estate should be proportional
November 18, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court ruled today that a proportional allocation of proceeds from a pre-trial settlement would be best
way to reimburse an estate for funeral and burial expenses.
MoreJustices issue ruling in casino revenue case
June 30, 2009
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court ruled today on an ongoing appeal about how casino revenue is funneled to a for-profit organization
in East Chicago, an issue that has also been raised in an ongoing federal racketeering suit in northern Indiana.
MoreJustices: Jury issues don't require new trial
June 18, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a jury award in favor of a man accused of rape in a civil suit, ruling the jury didn't
receive improper communications and the trial court didn't err in providing impasse assistance to the jury.
MoreTax exemption doesn't apply to hotel utilities
June 17, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court was split today in its ruling on whether a hotel was entitled to a sales tax exemption on utilities
it purchased during 2004 and 2005.
MoreJustices dismiss public school funding case
June 2, 2009
Michael HoskinsEven if Indiana's public school system falls short of where it should be in providing quality education, courts aren't
constitutionally able to set standards or establish a financing formula because that's a task falling solely to the General
Assembly.
MoreJustices split on discounted medical expenses
May 28, 2009
Michael HoskinsIn a ruling about whether insurance discounts can be used to determine reasonable medical expenses, two Indiana Supreme Court
justices say their colleagues have created a new rule that is "incomplete, misleading, and unfair" and will add
"layers of complexity, time, and expense to personal injury litigation, impairing the efficient administration of justice."
MoreCourt rules on ADR sanctions, Open Door Law
April 28, 2009
Michael HoskinsTrial courts can sanction government entities through the state's Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules, but officials
aren't necessarily acting in bad faith if they don't immediately approve mediated agreements to comply with the Indiana
Open Door Law, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
MoreHigh court hears first 'rocket docket' appeal
April 17, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn the first appeal of a juvenile case under Indiana Appellate Rule 14.1, the "rocket docket," the Indiana Supreme
Court ruled the juvenile court's determination that a child shouldn't be immediately reunited with his mother until
after the school year concluded - contrary to what the Department of Child Services recommended - wasn't clearly erroneous.
MoreJustices: No drunk driving on private property
April 9, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA person driving drunk can be arrested even if they are driving on private property, including their own property, ruled the
Indiana Supreme Court Wednesday.
MoreJustices uphold death sentence
April 7, 2009
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has upheld the sentence for a man sentenced to die for the 2001 rape and murder of a 15-year-old
girl in southern Indiana.
MoreHigh court rules on recovery issue
April 7, 2009
Jennifer NelsonUnder the statute governing the wrongful death of an unmarried adult with no dependents, the amount recoverable for reasonable
medical and hospital expenses necessitated by the alleged wrongful conduct is the total amount ultimately accepted after contractual
arrangements with an insurer, Medicare, or Medicaid, and not the total of the charges billed, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled
today.
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
The court of appeals not only tries to rewrite or interpret the law to suit their fancy, now they choose play stupid as well. Every consideration must be given to pro se litigants, who are not held to the same standards as attorneys, as stated by,SCOTUS. I assume they didn't have a lawyer, since one wasn't mentioned and I strongly suggest thatb the rest of the, origional petitioners get back in there and fight for their rights.
the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution
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.