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 editor Jennifer Nelson at 317-472-5234 or 800-425-2201, ext. 234; or jnelson@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. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT