Trial Reports

Uninsured motorist action

February 25, 2015
A submitted trial report on Barden v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Co.
More

Driver crossing backed-up street involved in accident

January 28, 2015
Case information on an Indianapolis accident with injury.
More

Pending petition for child support becomes applicable after Legislature amends statute

August 13, 2013
Marilyn Odendahl
A trial court will have to reconsider its ruling in a child support dispute in light of a state law that was changed while an appeal of the case was pending.
 
More

Motorcycle Accident

July 17, 2013
Garrett Minniear v. Chase King d/b/a King Masonry LLC
More

Medical malpractice

July 18, 2012
Resa v. Greathouse-Williams, et al.
More

Trucking accident

July 6, 2011
Willetter Morrison-Johnson and Steven Johnson v. Republic Services of Indiana, L.P. and Jason Stanley
More

Automobile accident involving police officer

May 25, 2011
Rolla Trent v. City of Peru
More

Automobile accident

April 26, 2011
Melissa Miller v. Crossroads Rehabilitation Center, Inc. and John Gocke
More

Vehicle negligence

March 2, 2011
Patricia Mowery and Harold Mowery Jr. v. Arron Hofmeister and Marathon Petroleum Company LP
More

Wrongful Death

December 22, 2010
Estate of Morris v. Sampson
More

Wrongful death

October 13, 2010
Schroeder v. Todd’s Companion Plus
More

Civil battery

October 13, 2010
Thomas v. Office of State Chemist
More

Automobile-bicycle collision

October 13, 2010
Donald E. Brier v. Irene Wegner
More

Eminent domain

September 1, 2010
State of Indiana v. Ecoff Trucking Inc.
More

Products Liability/Negligence

July 19, 2010
Jonathan M. Hinsey v.  Better Built Dry Kilns, Inc. and DeNardi, s.r.l., a/k/a Nardi Group and Nardi Partecipazioni, s.r.l.
More

Medical malpractice

June 23, 2010
Jason Cole Sr., as Personal Representative of the Estates of Patricia Harris Cole and Baby Jason Cole Jr. v. Joseph M. Smith, M.D.
More

Personal injury

May 26, 2010
Donna Saine v. Richard Walker, et al.
More

Uninsured motorist coverage claim

May 26, 2010
Michael Dec Jr. and Pamela M. Dec v. Encompass Insurance
More

Dog bite to child

April 28, 2010
Steven and Jessica Russell, as parent of Caroline Russell, a minor v. Charles and Sherry Baughman
More

Wrongful death

March 17, 2010
Jennifer Murphy, as parent of Travis Tyler Hensley, deceased v. DB Mobile Home Park
More

Negligence during fingerprinting

December 23, 2009
Grande v. Marion County Sheriff
More

Breach of contract

October 28, 2009
Aviation Professionals Institute, LLC v. Gary/ Chicago International Airport Authority
More
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT