First impression
COA: Judge could raise affirmative defense on behalf of pro se defendant
September 9, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA small-claims court may decide a case based upon the statute of limitations even if a defendant didn’t raise or mention
it at trial but the issue was discussed during trial, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in an issue of first impression.
MoreChild must show she is born out of wedlock to inherit
August 27, 2010
Jennifer NelsonRuling on the issue for the first time, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that the plain language of Indiana Code Section
29-1-2-7 requires a child to show she is born out of wedlock for inheritance purposes.
MoreLook-alike offense counts as controlled-substance offense in sentencing
August 25, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA previous conviction for a “look-alike” offense constitutes a controlled-substance offense for sentencing purposes,
the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for the first time Tuesday.
MoreCourt rules on first impression FLSA issue
August 24, 2010
Jennifer NelsonIn denying summary judgment for either party in a dispute involving the Fair Labor Standards Act, the U.S. District judge
noted the issue appears to be one of first impression in the 7th Circuit.
MoreFederal identity theft statute includes use of deceased's identity
August 18, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA person can be convicted of aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. Section 1028A for using the identity of a person who
is dead or alive, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in an issue of first impression.
MoreCOA addresses equine statute for first time
August 16, 2010
Jennifer NelsonRuling on the state’s Equine Activity Statute for the first time, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the statute
barred a woman’s claim for injuries during a horse competition.
MoreMajority overturns enticement of minor conviction based on error
July 26, 2010
Jennifer NelsonAddressing for the issue for the first time, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the “ostrich instruction”
in context of 18 U.S.C. Section 2422(b) was not appropriately given to the jury in an enticement of a minor trial.
MoreAttorney fees not recoverable under adult wrongful death statute
July 20, 2010
Elizabeth BrockettThe Indiana Court of Appeals today disagreed about an issue of first impression regarding recovery of attorney fees under
the adult wrongful death statute.
MoreCourt rules on first impression 'alibi' witness issue
July 13, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA trial court erred in excluding testimony of a defendant’s witnesses on the ground they were alibi witnesses, the Indiana
Court of Appeals ruled today in an issue of first impression.
More7th Circuit rules on attorney withdraw brief practicalities
June 22, 2010
Michael HoskinsRuling on an issue of first impression, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals today extended the logic of an eight-year-old case
to how criminal defendants challenge their supervised release and revocation penalties and what must be discussed in attorney
withdraw briefs on those issues.
MoreCOA upholds eviction action
April 26, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA trial court properly treated a couple's action against the man who agreed to purchase a house from them
as an eviction, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded. The court also analyzed for the first time the nature and effect of
a pre-closing possession agreement like the one in the instant case.
MoreTax court rules on inheritance issue
April 23, 2010
Jennifer NelsonIn Indiana, a person adopted pre-emancipation can't be considered a Class A transferee beneficiary for inheritance tax
purposes, the Indiana Tax Court ruled Thursday afternoon in an issue of first impression.
MoreCOA rules on first impression railroad issue
April 15, 2010
Jennifer NelsonIn an issue of first impression, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded a Federal Employer Liability Act claim premised on
unsafe ballast isn't precluded by Federal Railroad Safety Act regulations of ballast in a man's suit for injuries
he sustained while employed with a transportation company.
MoreJudges disagree on retroactive support issue
March 31, 2010
Jennifer NelsonIn a matter of first impression, a panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges couldn't agree on whether an initial support
order can be retroactive to a date preceding the filing of a petition for resolution. The judges disagreed as to whether
a court has the authority to reach into an intact marriage and order a party to pay child support to the other.
MoreCOA: no error in admitting no contest plea
March 25, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA plea of no contest can be admitted under Indiana Evidence Rule 803(8) as a public record proving the fact of a conviction,
the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed today. The appellate court found no error in admitting a defendant's nolo contendere
plea to a Florida murder as proof he was convicted of an offense qualifying him as a serious violent felon.
MoreSupreme Court grants 3 transfers
March 18, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court granted three transfers Wednesday, including a case of first impression on sentence enhancements.
MoreCouple not a 'successful party' in settlement
March 16, 2010
Jennifer NelsonDespite a lack of Indiana caselaw addressing the use of the term "successful party" for an award of attorney
fees after a settlement, the Indiana Court of Appeals deemed the term interchangeable with the term "prevailing party."
MoreHigh court grants 6 transfers
March 1, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer today to decide whether casinos can ban card counters. The high court also granted
transfer to five cases Thursday, including a case of first impression regarding post-retirement health-insurance premiums.
MoreCircuit Court rules on first impression issue
February 9, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals resolved an issue of first impression today: what is needed to be deemed "adequate writing"
under the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
MoreMajority: No double jeopardy in enhancement
January 20, 2010
Jennifer NelsonIn a matter of first impression, the Indiana Court of Appeals was divided about whether a man's sentence enhancement based
on his use of a deadly weapon violated the application of double-jeopardy principals.
MoreCOA: No presumption of undue influence
January 19, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA 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.
MoreCOA adopts 'site-specific' approach
December 3, 2009
Jennifer NelsonFor the first time, the Indiana Court of Appeals adopted a site-specific approach to rule on an insurance case with multiple
policies in several states. The appellate court had been following a uniform-contract-interpretation approach when ruling
on choice of law questions in contract actions.
MoreCourt splits on first impression dissipation case
November 30, 2009
Jennifer NelsonAn Indiana Court of Appeals judge dissented today from his colleagues' decision that a spouse may be found to have dissipated
property after refusing to sign and file joint tax returns because the judge believes the ruling is "bad law and bad
policy."
MoreCOA: Government vehicle exclusion is void
November 25, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals concluded today in a matter of first impression that the government vehicle exclusion in underinsured
motorist policies is void as against public policy.
MoreCOA: Insurance funds aren't a money judgment
November 16, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn a matter of first impression, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided today that a summary judgment granting insurance policies
isn't equivalent to a money judgment that would allow for 8 percent post-judgment interest.
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.