Courts

Nominations would fill 3 U.S. District judicial posts.

January 20, 2010
Michael Hoskins
A federal magistrate, a trial court judge, and a banking attorney who's served as a federal and county prosecutor are in line to be the newest additions to Indiana's federal bench.
More

Housing can cause conflicts in divorces

January 20, 2010
Rebecca Berfanger
There is often obvious animosity between a husband and wife who are divorcing, and for those still living under one roof, more problems can arise.
More

Circuit Court upholds attorney-fee reduction

January 19, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals wasn't swayed by an attorney's arguments that the amount of attorney's fees he was entitled to shouldn't have been reduced by nearly $90,000.
More

SCOTUS denies Evansville shopping center case

January 19, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The nation's highest court has refused to accept a case from the Indiana Supreme Court, which almost a year ago reduced a $2.3 million jury award in favor of an Evansville shopping center owner because of traffic flow issues created by the state.
More

COA: No presumption of undue influence

January 19, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A 2005 amendment to Indiana Code sets aside the common law presumption of undue influence with respect to certain transactions benefiting an attorney in fact, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today on an issue of first impression.
More

Dad who took son owes arrearage to mom

January 19, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals split today in its decision of who should receive back child support payments from a father who kidnapped his son for 16 years before turning himself in when the son was 23 years old.
More

Bill proposes monetary relief for exonoree

January 18, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A man recently released from prison after DNA evidence proved his innocence may receive $100,000 if one Indiana representative's bill passes.
More

State funding of judges being explored

January 15, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Lawmakers rejected a southern Indiana county's request this week for a new judge to run a family court, even though it proposes paying for it locally rather than with state money.
More

Justices decide statute, court rule issue

January 15, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Even 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.
More

Committees discuss various bills in second week

January 15, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana General Assembly made some of its first votes this week, while four legislative committees discussed an array of issues that may be of interest to the state's legal community.
More

Justices accept 2 civil cases

January 15, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Two civil cases got the go ahead from the Indiana Supreme Court this week to move up for consideration by the state's justices.
More

Law clear only guarantor's signature needed

January 14, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled on a guaranty issue today that is "so well-settled" in state law that the judges had difficulty finding recent cases restating it.
More

Law school reject sues to take bar exam

January 14, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
An Indianapolis man is suing the state Supreme Court justices and Board of Law Examiners because he believes he should be able to take the bar exam even if he didn't go to law school.
More

COA: Storage fees capped per statute

January 13, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed that the owner of a car involved in a fatal accident must pay storage fees to a towing company, but those fees must be capped at $1,500.
More

Justices to hear cheek swab, blood draw cases

January 13, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court is set to hear three arguments Thursday, including a case that challenges whether reasonable suspicion alone is sufficient for law enforcement to obtain DNA from a cheek swab.
More

Suit filed after statute of limitations end

January 12, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for a company that purchases and collects charged-off credit card debt, ruling the statute of limitations prevented the company from going after a delinquent consumer.
More

Woman can't prove pregnancy discrimination

January 12, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for a stone company after finding a woman couldn't prove the company knew she was pregnant when it decided to relocate her to another office.
More

Monroe County drug court wins award

January 12, 2010
IL Staff
The Monroe County Drug Treatment Court recently received a national award for its efforts to foster community transformation by reducing drug addiction and crime.
More

Justices take case of dismissed drug charges

January 8, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court will decide whether a trial court was correct when it sua sponte decided to exclude evidence from a warrantless search of a defendant's car and dismiss the drug charges against the man based on that search.
More

Man accuses public defenders of malpractice

January 8, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
An accused child molester who sat in jail for 2 1/2 years until his case was dismissed is suing his former public defenders for legal malpractice.
More

Justices overturn man's registration requirement

January 7, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A Grant Superior judge erred in sentencing a man to register as a sex offender because that requirement wasn't in place at the time he committed his crime, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled.
More

Suit claims courthouse violates ADA

January 7, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
Four defendants in cases pending before the St. Joseph Superior Court have filed a lawsuit claiming that county's courthouse is inaccessible for people with disabilities
More

CHINS finding establishes only status of child

January 6, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A finding that a child is in need of services only establishes the status of the child and means the child is a CHINS even if one parent isn't involved in the reasons for the determination, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today
More

Federal case challenges policies of Marion County Traffic Court

January 6, 2010
Michael Hoskins
A new lawsuit against Marion County's Traffic Court has implications for how all state-level judges handle fines for citations and violations, and raises questions about whether a part of the judicial system in Indiana's largest county operates fairly and openly.
More

Parents, child service provider group sue DCS over subsidies

January 6, 2010
Michael Hoskins
In a one-two punch, a pair of lawsuits filed a week apart in December hit the Indiana Department of Child Services square in the gut over how the agency planned to reduce payment rates for foster and adoptive parents and juvenile service providers.
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