Trial Reports

The Indiana Lawyer encourages attorneys to submit trial reports on verdicts and settlements received in Indiana courts. Trial reports are published on theindianalawyer.com and in the newspaper based on space availability.

To be published, trial reports must include the names of plaintiff and defense attorneys along with the case name and number. (*See exceptions listed below.) Lawyers are encouraged to include the supplemental information requested in the trial report form to enhance the value of the report. The case information box allows the submitting attorney to provide a narrative, up to 300 words, describing the case facts, interesting issues involved and outcome.

Attorneys submitting trial reports are required to submit a copy of the report to the opposing counsel. When submitting the trial report to the Indiana Lawyer, the submitting attorney must verify in the space provided on the form that the report has been sent to opposing counsel and include the date the report was sent. No trial report will be printed without this verification. Any objections to the report by opposing counsel should be made to the submitting attorney. The trial report will be held by the Indiana Lawyer for two weeks from the date submitted to give counsel time to discuss and resolve issues. The name of the attorney submitting the report will be published with the report.

Questions about the Indiana Lawyer trial report policy should be directed to Kelly Lucas, Editor/Publisher, at 317-472-5233 or 800-425-2201, ext. 233; or klucas@ibj.com.

*Exceptions to data requirement:

The name and number of a case involving a sexual assault or molestation may be withheld.

The name and location of practice of a physician involved in a medical malpractice settlement may be withheld. In medical malpractice settlements bound by confidentiality agreements, the portion of the agreement binding the parties to secrecy must accompany the report form. It will be used for verification purposes only.


I certify that I have sent a copy of this report, via e-mail or hard copy, to the opposing party (your signature). You must include the date on which you sent the copy to opposing counsel.



Action is Required.

Name of Case is Required.

Court & Case Number is Required.

Injuries is Required.

Court Date is Required.

City is Required.

Judge is Required.

Disposition is Required.

Plaintiff Attorney Name Required.

Defendant Attorney Name Required.

Insurance is Required.

Signature is Required.

Submitting is Required.

Submitting Attorney Phone is Required.

Submitting Attorney Phone is Required.

Case Information is Required.

Date is Required.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT