Latest News

Judges uphold public intox conviction

March 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a man’s public intoxication conviction, finding police had reasonable suspicion the man was intoxicated, and evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.
More

COA upholds drug conviction

March 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals rejected a man’s argument that his charges should be dismissed or he deserved a mistrial, finding sufficient evidence to support his dealing in cocaine conviction.
More

COA affirms judgment in favor of contractor in bid dispute

March 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has found that a school corporation seeking bids for renovations did not acquire the right to enforce a construction company’s mistaken bid.
More

Judges reduce sentence

March 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reduced the sentence of a defendant who used brass knuckles to injure a couple and then struck a victim’s father with his car, finding the 11-year sentence was inappropriate in light of the offenses and the defendant’s character.
More

COA finds court erred in allowing late response to be filed

March 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed the denial of summary judgment for a financial company seeking contract damages and other relief, finding the trial court should not have considered the defendant’s late-filed response on summary judgment.
More

Court splits over sentence modification

March 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was divided over whether a man could challenge his sentence following a guilty plea. One judge maintained that the defendant did not consent to his illegal sentence.
More

Burglary conviction was impermissible double jeopardy

March 29, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Because some of the facts establishing the elements of a Class A felony burglary conviction also established all of the essential elements of the Class B felony burglary conviction, the Indiana Court of Appeals ordered one conviction be vacated due to double jeopardy.
More

Governor names acting director of CJI

March 29, 2012
IL Staff
Gov. Mitch Daniels has appointed Mary L. Allen as acting director of the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute. She replaces Mark Massa, whom Daniels selected to join the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Court upholds finding woman isn't totally disabled

March 28, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Because a woman failed to seek appellate review of the decision by the Worker’s Compensation Board of Indiana that she was not permanently and totally disabled, she waived any claim of error related to that decision, the Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled.
More

Judges affirm denial of post-conviction relief

March 28, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals found a man’s double jeopardy claims were without merit, so his trial and direct appeal attorneys’ failure to raise these claims created no prejudice.
More

Justices will hear arguments in Floyd County

March 28, 2012
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court will visit New Albany Thursday to hear arguments in a case involving Rolls-Royce Corp.
More

Attorney recovering after shooting

March 28, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A Fort Wayne attorney shot Tuesday morning at his home is recovering from his injuries, which are not life threatening.
More

Massa to join Supreme Court April 2

March 28, 2012
IL Staff
Mark Massa, the state’s newest justice, will be sworn in April 2. Former Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard will administer the oath.
More

Debating the merits of mandatory seat belts on school buses

March 28, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that in larger buses, the spacing and height of the seats offer crash protection for children through “compartmentalization.” But opinions remain divided about whether compartmentalization does enough to protect students and whether school bus seat belts should be required by law.
More

Confidentiality issues raised

March 28, 2012
Michael Hoskins
St. Joseph County case creates concern about protecting callers’ identities on child abuse claims.
More

End of an era

March 28, 2012
IL Staff
Indiana Lawyer sat down with Randall T. Shepard for a Q&A before he retired from the Indiana Supreme Court March 23.
More

Making the most of online marketing

March 28, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
Firms invest more resources in web design.
More

Starting an IP practice

March 28, 2012
Michael Hoskins
Patent attorneys face unique concerns in creating firms.
More

Legal briefs raise copyright questions

March 28, 2012
Michael Hoskins
A New York federal suit challenges publishers' selling of attorneys' work.
More

Quality of Life: 10 tips for living a happier and healthier life

March 28, 2012
Jonna Kane MacDougall
It is March, so if you are like me, all of your New Year’s resolutions have been abandoned.
More

Indiana legislative round-up

March 28, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
A snapshot of key points from bills heard in the 2012 legislative session. All enrolled acts were signed by the governor by March 20.
More

Court rules on child support, parenting time modifications

March 27, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled on a case involving parenting time and child support issues between a mother and father.
More

Judges: injuries from crash on public road not covered

March 27, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld a decision by the state worker’s compensation board that denied a security guard’s claim that a car accident on the way to work happened in the course of his employment and should be compensated.
More

Closed-circuit testimony not unconstitutional

March 27, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
The Indiana Court of Appeals held that a man who repeatedly molested a young girl was not deprived of his right to cross-examine his accuser when she testified via closed-circuit television.
More

Federalist Society to host talk on unions

March 27, 2012
IL Staff
The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, Indianapolis Lawyers Division Chapter, will host a lunchtime speaker at noon March 29 at the Conrad Indianapolis, Hong Kong Room, 50 W. Washington St.
More
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