Oral arguments

Appeals court to hear arguments at Indy high school

March 14, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals will visit Pike High School in Indianapolis this week to hear arguments in a case in which a man appeals his drug dealing conviction.
More

Supreme Court hears arguments in victims' advocates subpoena case

February 17, 2011
Rebecca Berfanger
The Indiana Supreme Court heard oral arguments today involving the subpoena of records from a domestic violence agency by a defendant who had been charged with two counts of Class A felony child molesting.
More

Same firm, but different cases before Supreme Court on same day

February 2, 2011
Michael Hoskins
For appellate attorneys Paul Jefferson and Mark Crandley at Barnes & Thornburg, this double-argument day Jan. 20 was a new experience that many say isn’t very common in the legal community.
More

Justices hear 3 cases, including robo-calls appeal

January 20, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court heard three arguments this morning, including one case that it had granted emergency transfer to regarding whether the state should be constitutionally allowed to restrict robo-calls to residents.
More

Arguments set in Medicaid appeal

January 19, 2011
Rebecca Berfanger
In a case that involves whether Medicaid applicants who were rejected can include information that was not in their initial applications when they appeal, the Indiana Supreme Court has set oral arguments for March 3 at 9 a.m.
More

SCOTUS hears Indiana case

January 19, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Indiana Federal Community Defender Bill Marsh made his debut appearance before the nation’s highest court on Jan. 12, arguing an Indiana case that questions whether vehicular flight from police is considered “violent” and warrants a higher sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act.
More

Indiana Supreme Court to hear arguments on victim-advocate privilege

January 5, 2011
Rebecca Berfanger
Domestic violence victims’ advocates and criminal law attorneys are waiting on the Indiana Supreme Court’s decision in a case involving a criminal defendant’s subpoena for records from a victim’s advocacy organization.
More

COA to visit high school for oral arguments

November 11, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in a trespass and resisting law enforcement case at an Indianapolis high school Nov. 16.
More

Appellate court travels for arguments

October 18, 2010
IL Staff
As part of its “Appeals on Wheels” initiative, the Indiana Court of Appeals will hit the road this week to hear arguments.
More

Law school hosts appellate hearings

October 13, 2010
IL Staff
Indiana University Maurer School of Law – Bloomington recently hosted two appellate hearings at the law school’s moot court room.
More

7th Circuit mulls adult-business laws

September 29, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is considering whether a Southern District of Indiana judge correctly weighed evidence in granting a preliminary injunction that stopped Indianapolis from enforcing a 2002 ordinance regulating adult-business hours.
More

Justices to hear arguments at Bloomington law school

September 10, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court travels to Bloomington Monday to hear arguments in the case of a teenage girl who was injured by a golf ball while driving the beverage cart at a golf outing.
More

Supreme Court uses PBS to educate public on courts

August 31, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court is teaming up with the state’s Public Broadcasting Service to offer specials informing residents about the court system.
More

Technical difficulties snag high-profile appeal arguments

August 25, 2010
Michael Hoskins
After a hiccup in the state judiciary’s online access to oral arguments, Indiana Court of Appeals Chief Judge John Baker borrowed some words from television broadcasters of the past: “Please stand by.”
More

7th Circuit rehears Second Amendment case

May 21, 2010
Rebecca Berfanger
7th Circuit Court of Appeals judges in Chicago didn’t take the issue of Second Amendment rights lightly when they heard oral arguments en banc Thursday for United States of America v. Steven M. Skoien, No. 08-3770.
More

Attorney's 6th SCOTUS visit intense

May 12, 2010
Michael Hoskins
A Terre Haute lawyer made his sixth argument before the nation’s highest court April 28, and he describes the hour-long experience to be the most intense of those he’s had before the Supreme Court of the United States.
More

Justices to hear card-counting case Wednesday

April 5, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court will hear arguments in three cases Wednesday, including whether a casino can ban someone who counts cards.
More

Appellate court to hear arguments in Lafayette

March 30, 2010
IL Staff
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals will visit Ivy Tech Community College in Lafayette Thursday to hear the appeal of a man challenging his sentence for dealing cocaine.
More

COA to hear arguments at IU-Indy

March 19, 2010
IL StaffMore

Justices hear voter ID case arguments

March 17, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court heard arguments March 4 about the state's controversial voter identification law, and is considering whether the requirements impose an unconstitutional burden on some voters who can't obtain the necessary photo ID cards.
More

Justice ponders importance of party-line vote

March 5, 2010
Michael Hoskins
As the Indiana Supreme Court justices considered the constitutionality of the state's voter ID law this week, one jurist wondered how much the legislative process might factor into the court's analysis of whether a statute is constitutional.
More

Court hears state voter ID case

March 4, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday morning sharply questioned attorneys about the state's five-year-old voter identification law, debating whether the requirements impose an unconstitutional burden on some voters who can't obtain the necessary photo ID.
More

Indiana attorney set for SCOTUS Wednesday

January 27, 2010
Michael Hoskins
A Terre Haute attorney is making his sixth argument before the nation's highest court Wednesday, but his first before the newest justice. This time he's there on a case that could ultimately change campaign-finance disclosure rules nationally.
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

Justices consider 'youth program center' issue

November 24, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Walter Whatley isn't disputing the fact that he was in possession of cocaine and that he should be held accountable for that.Instead, the Indianapolis defendant argues that he shouldn't have been convicted of Class A felony cocaine possession, which is what he was charged with given that he had the cocaine within 1,000 feet of a "youth program center" or a church near his home, where police arrested him after finding more than three grams of the illegal substance on him.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT