Justice Theodore R. Boehm
Indiana 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.
MoreInterviews for next justice under way today
July 6, 2010
Michael HoskinsOne by one, attorneys are appearing before the seven-member Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission to explain why they should
be the next Indiana Supreme Court justice.
MoreHigh court opening process wasn't public 25 years ago
July 2, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe nearly three-dozen attorneys who’ve applied to become the state’s newest justice sets a record for the past
25 years, but it falls short of the number who’d applied for an Indiana Supreme Court post a quarter century ago.
More34 apply to become next Indiana justice
July 1, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThere are a lot of people in Indiana who want to become the state’s next Supreme Court Justice.
MoreJustices address habitual-offender statute
June 29, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court tackled the state’s habitual-offender statute today in two separate rulings, finding that
an instant offense of drug dealing, coupled with a prior conviction, can qualify a defendant as a habitual offender.
MoreJustices order trial on reasonable force issue
June 28, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA law enforcement officer’s use of force in excess of reasonable force authorized by statute isn't shielded from
liability under the "enforcement of a law" immunity under Indiana Code Section 34-13-3-3(8), the Indiana Supreme
Court held today.
MoreJustices differ on defining 'youth program center'
June 9, 2010
Jennifer NelsonTwo Indiana Supreme Court justices objected to affirming a man’s drug sentence for possession within 1,000 feet of a
“youth program center” because the church that ran the programs wasn’t easily identifiable as regularly
running programs for kids.
MoreIndiana Justice Boehm stepping down after 14 years
June 9, 2010
Michael HoskinsAfter more than a decade on the Indiana Supreme Court, Justice Theodore Boehm is ready to enter the next stage of his life
and career.
MoreSchedule set to fill upcoming Indiana Supreme Court vacancy
June 9, 2010
Michael HoskinsAnyone who wants to be the next Indiana Supreme Court justice has until the end of June to apply for upcoming vacancy on the
state’s highest court.
MoreSchedule set for Supreme Court justice vacancy
June 2, 2010
Michael HoskinsAnyone who wants to be the next Indiana Supreme Court justice has until the end of this month to apply.
MoreSearch begins for new Supreme Court justice
May 25, 2010
Michael HoskinsFor the first time in more than a decade, Indiana’s Supreme Court will find itself searching for a new justice.
MoreBREAKING: Justice Boehm stepping down
May 25, 2010
Michael HoskinsIndiana Supreme Court Justice Theodore R. Boehm announced today that he is retiring from the state’s highest court on
Sept. 30, 2010.
MoreCounty immunity in weather-related accident
January 27, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for a county sued as a result of a weather-related accident, holding government
liability immunity in steps taken as a result of the weather lasts until at least the weather condition has stabilized.
MoreIndiana order doesn't modify Florida order
October 7, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court affirmed that a Vanderburgh Superior Court's order requiring a father to pay less than the full
amount of a Florida support obligation, which allowed him to avoid incarceration, didn't impermissibly modify the foreign
judgment.
MoreJustices rule in favor of cup manufacturers
September 8, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe 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.
MoreJustices: Appeal not available after guilty plea
August 25, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA 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.
MoreAlarm company's actions not covered by policies
July 21, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court reversed the denial of summary judgment on an insurance company's coverage defenses, ruling
its insured's actions leading to a lawsuit were "errors or omissions," and so weren't covered by the commercial
general liability or umbrella policies.
MoreJustices: Anders withdrawals not allowed
June 26, 2009
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has rejected a procedure set up by the nation's top court more than four decades ago that allows
attorneys to withdraw from criminal appeals they deem frivolous. Our justices say it's practically and financially more
efficient to simply proceed with an appeal and let that process play out.
MoreJustices rule on uninsured motorist statute
May 14, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn an issue of first impression, the Indiana Supreme Court had to decide whether an insurance company's uninsured motorist
policy - which requires the bodily injury be sustained by an insured - violates the state's uninsured motorist statute
and is unenforceable.
MoreHigh court reverses termination of mom's rights
April 27, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe majority of Indiana Supreme Court justices ruled in a parental termination case that the evidence presented didn't
clearly show a mother's rights to her son should be terminated. One justice dissented because he believes an appellate
court should defer to the lower court in assessing the facts of a case.
MoreHigh court rules on self-representation issue
March 17, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's ruling that a defendant who was competent enough to stand trial wasn't
competent to represent himself at trial, an issue on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States.
MoreHigh court: land seller not liable in death
March 10, 2009
Jennifer NelsonAddressing an issue of first impression today, the Indiana Supreme Court considered under what circumstances a vendor
of land may be liable to a third party for harm resulting from the condition of trees on the property near a road.
MoreCourt rules on upward sentence revision
February 10, 2009
Jennifer MehalikThe Indiana Supreme Court held today that appellate courts have the authority to increase a sentence on appeal, but the state
can't initiate or cross-appeal review of the sentence and can't ask for a greater sentence if the defendant doesn't
initiate an appeal.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
Longest-practicing female attorney in Indiana has no plans to retire
-
Criminal code and expungement bills signed by governor
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
SCOTUS rules against Indiana farmer in seed patent case
-
Social media sleuths find evidence, but admissibility requires authentication
Court Calendar
-
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
-
June 18, 2013 State of Indiana v. Robert Owens - 6/18/13
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
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.