Indiana Supreme Court
Teachers will have civics lesson at Indiana Statehouse
April 12, 2012
IL StaffThe Indiana Supreme Court, the International Association of Defense Counsel and the Indiana Bar Foundation are collaborating
to present a workshop for Indiana teachers April 13.
MoreJustice Frank Sullivan leaving bench to teach
April 11, 2012
Michael HoskinsSullivan's departure marks the Indiana Supreme Court's third vacancy in two years.
MoreIndiana's newest jurist
April 11, 2012
Michael HoskinsMark Massa takes the bench on the Indiana Supreme Court April 2.
MoreIndiana Supreme Court accepts one case; denies transfer to seven
April 9, 2012
IL StaffIndiana’s high court has granted transfer in a case that left the Court of Appeals divided.
MoreJustice Frank Sullivan joining McKinney School of Law
April 2, 2012
Michael HoskinsJustice Frank Sullivan will leave the Indiana Supreme Court to teach business law and corporate finance at Indiana University
Robert H. McKinney School of Law.
MoreJustices will hear arguments in Floyd County
March 28, 2012
IL StaffThe Indiana Supreme Court will visit New Albany Thursday to hear arguments in a case involving Rolls-Royce Corp.
MoreMassa to join Supreme Court April 2
March 28, 2012
IL StaffMark Massa, the state’s newest justice, will be sworn in April 2. Former Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard will administer
the oath.
MoreEnd of an era
March 28, 2012
IL StaffIndiana Lawyer sat down with Randall T. Shepard for a Q&A before he retired from the Indiana Supreme Court March
23.
MoreJustices asked to take feticide case
March 28, 2012
Jenny MontgomeryOn March 14, the one-year anniversary of Bei Bei Shuai’s imprisonment on attempted feticide and murder charges, attorney
Linda Pence notified media that Pence Hensel and attorneys from the National Advocates for Pregnant Women filed a petition
on March 9 for the Indiana Supreme Court to grant transfer in the case.
MoreSCOTUS declines to take Indiana criminal case
March 26, 2012
Michael HoskinsThe Supreme Court of the United States won’t take an Indiana case asking whether a defendant’s second trial was barred by
the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment, and so a state Supreme Court decision on the issue will stand.
MoreIndiana justices deny 8 cases, plus associational standing appeal
March 26, 2012
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court declined to take eight cases last week, and the court also reversed a prior decision to hear an
electric utility’s appeal based on an associational standing question.
MoreGovernor: Mark Massa 'superb choice' for Supreme Court
March 23, 2012
Michael HoskinsOn Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard's final day as a member of the Indiana Supreme Court, Gov. Mitch Daniels named Mark S.
Massa, a former state and federal prosecutor, as the state’s newest justice.
MoreMark Massa named Indiana Supreme Court justice
March 23, 2012
Michael HoskinsGov. Mitch Daniels has chosen Indiana Criminal Justice Institute Director Mark S. Massa as the state’s newest Supreme
Court justice.
MoreJustices uphold probation revocation for child support non-payment
March 23, 2012
Michael HoskinsA trial judge was correct in revoking a man’s probation based on his failure to pay weekly child support as a condition
of his probation, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled.
MoreDivided Supreme Court orders new murder trial
March 23, 2012
Michael HoskinsThree justices have tossed out a murder conviction, ordering a new trial on the grounds that the trial judge should have given
the jury the option to consider a lesser offense of reckless homicide.
MoreCourt rules FSSA notices are unconstitutional
March 22, 2012
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has held that the notices sent by the state Family and Social Services Administration to inform
applicants they were denied Medicaid, food stamps, or family assistance benefits are unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment’s
due process clause because they do not sufficiently explain the reasons for being denied.
MoreSupreme Court examines Indiana's blacklisting statute
March 22, 2012
Michael HoskinsIn declaring precedent from 1904 bad law, the Indiana Supreme Court has determined that individuals who’ve voluntarily
left employment can pursue a claim against their former employers under the state’s blacklisting statute.
MoreJustices disagree on pollution exclusion coverage
March 22, 2012
Michael HoskinsA divided Indiana Supreme Court has held that the pollution exclusion contained in a general commercial liability policy is
ambiguous and should be construed to provide coverage rather than in favor of the insurance company trying to deny coverage.
MoreJustices rule on construction manager's duty for jobsite safety
March 22, 2012
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court has held that a construction manager on the Lucas Oil Stadium construction project didn’t
have a legal duty to ensure jobsite safety to a subcontractor’s employee either by contract or individual actions, and
as a result, cannot be held liable for workplace negligence.
MoreHigh court upholds stalking conviction
March 21, 2012
Jennifer NelsonIt’s up to a trier of fact to determine if someone’s conduct involved repeated or continuing harassment to qualify
as stalking, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled, since there is no statutorily determinate timeframe required for this type of
conviction.
MoreMajority upholds finding of contempt
March 21, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThree Indiana justices affirmed a trial court order finding a business owner, his attorney and an environmental firm in contempt
for doing work on a site with possible environmental issues after a temporary restraining order had been issued.
MoreSupreme Court declines to set aside tax deed
March 21, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court has reversed a trial court’s decision to set aside a tax deed, finding the Marion County auditor’s
office satisfied the due process requirement articulated by the United States Supreme Court.
MoreJustices explain opinion in IBM case
March 21, 2012
Jennifer NelsonLast month, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that Gov. Mitch Daniels doesn’t have to testify in the dispute between the
state and IBM regarding a cancelled contract to modernize the state’s welfare system. On Wednesday, the justices explained
their reasoning.
MoreJustices affirm ruling in dispute between health care facility and FSSA
March 21, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court has affirmed the outcome of a case between Family and Social Services Administration and a decertified
intermediate care facility, in which the net result was a wash for both sides.
MoreJustices disagree on whether jury instruction requires new trial
March 21, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe majority of Indiana justices ordered a new trial on liability for a school corporation being sued for wrongful death,
finding one of the jury instructions could have misled the jury about a key issue regarding liability.
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.