Oral arguments

COA to hear insurance, attorney fee cases

April 6, 2009
IL Staff
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges will hear arguments Tuesday in Evansville in an insurance coverage case while another panel in Indianapolis will hear arguments in a case involving the division of attorney fees.
More

Appellate court to hear arguments at ISU

March 25, 2009
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals travels to Terre Haute Thursday to hear arguments in a cocaine conviction case.
More

Appellate panel travels to Hammond

March 4, 2009
IL StaffMore

COA visits high school to hear arguments

February 24, 2009
IL StaffMore

COA to hear arguments at Indy high school

January 29, 2009
IL Staff
Indiana's Court of Appeals will hear arguments at an Indianapolis high school Friday in a case determining whether a juvenile committed auto theft, a Class D felony if committed by an adult.
More

COA travels to West Lafayette for arguments

January 26, 2009
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals will visit West Lafayette Tuesday to hear arguments in a case involving a warrantless search of a vehicle.
More

High court to hear insurance, dissolution cases

January 7, 2009
Jennifer MehalikMore

COA to webcast more arguments

January 6, 2009
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals has announced plans to webcast most oral arguments in the Court of Appeals courtroom in the Statehouse.
More

High court to hear school funding, warrant cases

December 3, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court will hear arguments Thursday in two cases, including one regarding the state's school funding system.
More

Ukrainian judges observe Indiana legal system

November 21, 2008
IL Staff
Five Ukrainian judges have been in central Indiana this week examining the U.S. judicial system.
More

Arguments set in Lake County early-voting case

October 27, 2008
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear arguments in the Lake County early-voter registration appeal at 1:30 p.m. EDT Oct. 30 in the Indiana Supreme Court Courtroom, Statehouse Room 317, Indianapolis.
More

High court to hear riverboat receipts arguments

October 22, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court will hear arguments Thursday in two cases involving the dispersion of a percentage of riverboat casino revenues in East Chicago.
More

Supreme Court travels to IU-Bloomington

October 14, 2008
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court will be in Bloomington Thursday to hear arguments in a case involving a dispute between a landlord and his former tenants.
More

COA to hear license plate args in Greencastle

October 13, 2008
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals travels to Greencastle Oct. 14 to hear arguments in a case involving Indiana's "In God We Trust" license plates.
More

Court hears arguments in confrontation case

October 9, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court heard arguments today in a case that asks whether the defendant had the right to confront the lab technician who performed the DNA testing relevant to the case.
More

COA to visit IU School of Law - Bloomington

September 25, 2008
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear arguments in an Elkhart County child molesting case in Bloomington Sept. 29.
More

7th Circuit panel visits Indy law school

September 24, 2008
Michael Hoskins
A 7th Circuit Court of Appeals panel converged on the Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis campus Tuesday to hear three appellate arguments in its' first visit in more than a decade.
More

7th Circuit to hear arguments at law school

September 22, 2008
IL Staff
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals travels Tuesday to hear arguments at Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis.
More

2 Supreme Court arguments Thursday

July 7, 2008
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court will hear two arguments Thursday, including a death penalty appeal by a man whose appeal has already once been denied by the justices.
More

7th Circuit, Supreme Court arguments Friday

February 20, 2008
Michael Hoskins
Anyone wanting to watch or listen to appellate arguments in federal or state court will have a chance Friday.
More

7th Circuit hears arguments on judicial free speech

September 17, 2007
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments Friday morning in a case in which the state's Commission on Judicial Qualifications and Disciplinary Commission want the court to reverse the District Court's ruling that granted a permanent injunction against provisions in Indiana's Code of Judicial Conduct.
More

AG argues automated dialing statute in 7th Circuit

April 3, 2007
Michael HoskinsMore
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 pager
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