Latest News

Could Indiana adopt a law like Arizona's?

July 7, 2010
Rebecca Berfanger
Immigration attorneys and victims advocates are reading up on the Arizona illegal immigrant law and bracing themselves for what a similar bill in Indiana could mean for their clients.
More

Navigating the patent process

July 7, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Attorneys in the intellectual property arena waited for “the case” to come down during the past year, but what they got June 28 was anything but the landmark decision so many lawyers expected.
More

Renovations under way at federal courthouse

July 7, 2010
Michael Hoskins
As attorneys and judges continue filing and litigating cases in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, a renovation project is underway and adding new life into the federal courthouse in downtown Indianapolis.
More

What's a patent worth?

July 7, 2010
Rebecca Berfanger
The question of “What is my patent worth?” is never an easy one to answer, according to intellectual property attorneys and others who specialize in helping patent holders determine what they should expect for a patent.
More

Indiana Supreme Court review analyzes trends, voting patterns

July 7, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Every summer, an attorney-authored review analyzes and highlights the Indiana Supreme Court’s activity during the past year. But only rarely does that report come at a time when the state’s highest court is seeing change.
More

Interviews for next justice under way today

July 6, 2010
Michael Hoskins
One by one, attorneys are appearing before the seven-member Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission to explain why they should be the next Indiana Supreme Court justice.
More

Canine sniff case gets second look, same ruling

July 6, 2010
Elizabeth Brockett
On a rehearing petition from the state, the Indiana Court of Appeals reaffirmed today its holding in reversing a conviction based on a traffic stop involving a canine sniff.
More

Court affirms felony nonsupport of a dependent conviction

July 6, 2010
Elizabeth Brockett
A man claiming he proved he was unable to pay child support because of his numerous incarcerations did not convince the Indiana Court of Appeals. In its ruling today, the court relied on Becker v. Becker to affirm the man’s conviction of Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent child.
More

High court opening process wasn't public 25 years ago

July 2, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The nearly three-dozen attorneys who’ve applied to become the state’s newest justice sets a record for the past 25 years, but it falls short of the number who’d applied for an Indiana Supreme Court post a quarter century ago.
More

Lawyer privately reprimanded for hiring inmate

July 2, 2010
The Indiana Supreme Court handed down a private reprimand to a Shelby County attorney who engaged in misconduct by hiring a nonlawyer inmate to help research and prepare a post-conviction relief petition for another client.
More

District judge asks court to answer certified question

July 2, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Indiana is asking the state’s Supreme Court to accept a certified question in litigation involving the Indiana Products Liability Act.
More

High court names ICLEO participants

July 2, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has announced the 26 participants in this year’s Indiana Conference for Legal Education Opportunities Summer Institute.
More

Police entry violated man's constitutional rights

July 1, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The entry by police into a man’s apartment based on uncorroborated information from an anonymous source violated the man’s federal and state constitutional rights, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Wednesday. Because of this, the drugs found in the man’s apartment must be suppressed.
More

Justices: no summary judgment for grocer in negligence suit

July 1, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the denial of a supermarket’s motion for summary judgment in a negligence case, finding the company failed to carry its burden in showing that criminal activity on its premises at the time a customer was assaulted wasn’t foreseeable.
More

1-year limit toll not extended by appeal

July 1, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The one-year limit to file a motion for relief from judgment under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) is not from the time an appeals court rules on the matter, but must be made within one year after the trial court enters its order, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today in an issue of first impression.
More

34 apply to become next Indiana justice

July 1, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
There are a lot of people in Indiana who want to become the state’s next Supreme Court Justice. 
More

COA finds fundamental error in juvenile case, again

June 30, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
In a case identical to one it ruled on earlier this year, the Indiana Court of Appeals found the state violated a juvenile’s right to counsel at her detention hearing.
More

Booking card exception to hearsay rule

June 30, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A booking card created by law enforcement in the course of a ministerial, nonevaluative booking process is not subject to the police reports exclusion under Indiana Evidence Rule 803(8), the Indiana Court of Appeals decided today.
More

Water company not a political subdivision

June 29, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The company that provides the water utility to the City of Indianapolis is not a political subdivision of the state, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded today.
More

Justices address habitual-offender statute

June 29, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court tackled the state’s habitual-offender statute today in two separate rulings, finding that an instant offense of drug dealing, coupled with a prior conviction, can qualify a defendant as a habitual offender.
More

COA balances free speech vs. minor's privacy rights

June 29, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was faced with competing constitutional rights today: a mother’s right to free political speech versus her daughter’s right to privacy as to whether her father allegedly sexually abused her.
More

Justices answer certified question

June 29, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court Monday answered the certified question sent to them by the U.S. District Court in New York about what standard should be applied in determining whether a director is “disinterested” under Indiana Code Section 23-1-32-4(d).
More

High court takes 4 cases

June 29, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court granted four transfers June 24, including one in which the Indiana Court of Appeals extended the duty to prevent injury to sports participants to include sporting event volunteers.
More

COA reverses judgment on 1 cross-claim in library appeal

June 28, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indianapolis-Marion County Public Library should be able to pursue a cross-claim against an engineering company for breach of professional standard of care, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today.
More

SCOTUS has historic day in ending session

June 28, 2010
Michael Hoskins
On a historic day for the Supreme Court of the United States, one justice stepped down after more than three decades as his successor began her confirmation hearings before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.
More
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