Marriage

Japanese court says married couples have no right to separate names

December 16, 2015
 Bloomberg News
Japan’s Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a law forcing couples to have the same name after marriage is not a breach of the constitution, lawyers for the plaintiffs said, upholding a system in place since the 19th century.
More

Kentucky clerk won't interfere with gay marriage licenses

September 14, 2015
 Associated Press
Clerk Kim Davis returned to work Monday for the first time since being jailed for disobeying a federal judge and said she was faced with a “seemingly impossible choice” between following her conscience and losing her freedom over denying marriage licenses to gay couples.
More

Kentucky clerk defies court order to issue gay-marriage license

August 27, 2015
 Associated Press
The clerk's office in Moorehead, Kentucky, on Thursday again refused to issue a marriage license to a gay couple, in defiance of a Supreme Court of the United States ruling that legalized same-sex marriage across the country two months ago.
More

Reversal: Ex-DOC worker wins appeal in bid to marry inmate

August 17, 2015
Dave Stafford
A former contract worker who quit her job at an Indiana prison after her sexual relationship with an inmate was discovered was wrongly denied permission to marry him, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
More

Trial court erred in denying dad custody vs. contemptuous mom

August 11, 2015
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Court of Appeals bluntly reversed denial of a father’s petition for primary custody of his children, finding their mother undermined him and deprived him of court-ordered visitation.
More

COA clears way for broader use of postnuptial agreements

July 29, 2015
Michael Kohlhaas, Jim Reed
A February decision by the Indiana Court of Appeals makes postnuptial agreements a more attractive option for married couples who, considering divorce, decide instead to reconcile.
More

For better or worse, the Internet impacts relationships

July 29, 2015
Margaret Ryznar
In just a quarter of a century, the Internet has had a huge impact at the beginning and end of people’s relationships, challenging family law to keep up.
More

Court ruling against gay marriage could cause legal 'chaos'

June 10, 2015
 Associated Press
Gay and lesbian couples could face legal chaos if the Supreme Court of the United States rules against same-sex marriage in the next few weeks.
More

Same-sex marriage plaintiffs say fight against discrimination will continue

June 5, 2015
Marilyn Odendahl
Standing in the rotunda of the Indiana Statehouse, Jim Obergefell, named plaintiff in the marriage equality case currently before the Supreme Court of the United States, said a victory in the country’s highest court will not end the battle against discrimination.
More

Texas attorney general argues gay couple's marriage is void

February 20, 2015
 Associated Press
As a newlywed lesbian couple in Texas celebrate defying a statewide ban on gay marriage, the state's Republican attorney general is preparing to tell a court Friday why it should rule their nuptials invalid.
More

Same-sex couple gets divorce in Indiana

November 10, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
Indiana residents Linda Bruner and Lori Roberts made history Nov. 10 by becoming the first same-sex couple in the state to legally divorce.
More

7th Circuit stays same-sex marriage decisions

September 15, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted the motion for a stay of mandate filed by the defendants in Indiana’s same-sex marriage lawsuits.
More

Indiana agrees to recognize another same-sex marriage involving ill spouse

September 12, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The state will recognize the out-of-state marriage of a Whiting couple in which one woman is receiving hospice care for terminal cancer.
More

State asks 7th Circuit to stay same-sex marriage ruling

September 10, 2014
Dave Stafford
The Indiana attorney general’s office Wednesday asked the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to stay its Sept. 4 order striking down Indiana’s ban on same-sex marriage.
More

Indiana files same-sex marriage petition with SCOTUS

September 9, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
In the race to get a same-sex marriage case before the Supreme Court of the United States this term, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller’s office is arguing the state’s three lawsuits provide the best vehicle for resolving the same-sex marriage issue.
More

7th Circuit finds Indiana’s marriage law irrational and unconstitutional

September 5, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
Indiana’s assertion that preventing same-sex marriage encourages responsible procreation among heterosexuals was unequivocally rejected in a blistering opinion from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which said the state’s argument could not be taken seriously.
More

7th Circuit: Gay marriage bans in Indiana, Wisconsin unconstitutional

September 4, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed federal court rulings in Indiana and Wisconsin invalidating the states’ prohibitions of same-sex marriage.
More

Crowds line up to hear federal gay marriage appeal

August 26, 2014
 Associated Press
The legal skirmish over same-sex marriage shifted Tuesday to a federal appeals court in Chicago, where nearly 200 people lined up hoping to hear arguments in a case challenging gay marriage bans in Wisconsin and Indiana.
More

Judges weigh 4 states' same-sex marriage cases

August 8, 2014
 Associated Press
Three federal judges weighing arguments in a landmark gay marriage hearing this week peppered attorneys on both sides with tough questions, with one judge expressing deep skepticism about whether courts are the ideal setting for major social change and another saying the democratic process can be too slow.
More

Hamilton County clerk voluntary dismissed from same-sex marriage appeal

July 30, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
One Indiana county clerk has withdrawn from the state’s fight to maintain its ban on same-sex marriage.
More

Same-sex couples tell 7th Circuit Indiana’s marriage ban is discriminatory

July 30, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
Plaintiffs challenging Indiana’s ban on same-sex marriage filed their appellate brief with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals July 29, making their argument that the state’s marriage law violates their constitutional rights.
More

Same-sex couples ask Social Security Administration to recognize their Indiana marriage

July 28, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
A pair of Indiana same-sex couples who were married in June have asked the U.S. Social Security Administration to recognize their marriages.
More

1 same-sex marriage lawsuit remains in District Court

July 16, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
One challenge to Indiana’s same-sex marriage law remains in federal court and could, again, open a window for gay and lesbian couples in the state to get married, an attorney representing the plaintiffs in the case said.
More

7th Circuit grants motion recognizing marriage of same-sex couple in Indiana

July 1, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an order compelling the state of Indiana to recognize the marriage of one same-sex couple.
More

Indiana argues same-sex marriage of terminally ill woman should not be recognized

July 1, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
While conceding the same-sex marriage lawsuit involving a terminally ill Indiana woman would warrant an exception, the Indiana attorney general maintained no legal exception has been found and the marriage should not be recognized by the state.
More
Page  1 2 3 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  2. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  3. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

  4. For some strange reason this story, like many on this ezine that question the powerful, seems to have been released in two formats. Prior format here: http://www.theindianalawyer.com/nominees-selected-for-us-attorney-in-indiana/PARAMS/article/44263 That observed, I must note that it is quite refreshing that denizens of the great unwashed (like me) can be allowed to openly question powerful elitists at ICE MILLER who are on the public dole like Selby. Kudos to those at this ezine who understand that they cannot be mere lapdogs to the powerful and corrupt, lest freedom bleed out. If you wonder why the Senator resisted Selby, consider reading the comments here for a theory: http://www.theindianalawyer.com/nominees-selected-for-us-attorney-in-indiana/PARAMS/article/44263

  5. Why is it a crisis that people want to protect their rights themselves? The courts have a huge bias against people appearing on their own behalf and these judges and lawyers will face their maker one day and answer for their actions.

ADVERTISEMENT