Supreme Court of the United States

SCOTUS remands Indiana death penalty case

October 20, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong in disposing of an Indiana man's death penalty challenges without any explanation, and should have allowed a Northern District of Indiana judge to consider those unresolved claims, the nation's highest court ruled today.
More

SCOTUS accepts Indiana offender-registry case

September 30, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The nation's highest court has taken an Indiana case that asks whether someone can be criminally prosecuted under a federal sex-offense registry law if that defendant's underlying offense and move to another state predated the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act's passage.
More

COA says voter I.D. law unconstitutional

September 17, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has tossed out the state's 4-year-old voter identification law as unconstitutional, bringing new attention to a statute that has been upheld by the nation's highest court.
More

Indiana funds want SCOTUS review

September 4, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Three Indiana pension and construction funds are asking the Supreme Court of the United States to reconsider their objections to the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings that earlier this year resulted in the sale of most of the American automaker's assets to an Italian company.
More

Judges disagree on search validity

August 31, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
On remand from the Supreme Court of the United States to reconsider under a recent ruling, the Indiana Court of Appeals reaffirmed the forfeiture of a woman's car following the arrest of her son for driving while suspended. One judge dissented because she believes the search of the vehicle was unreasonable in light of the recent ruling.
More

SCOTUS: Elected judges must step aside

June 8, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Elected judges must recuse themselves in cases where large campaign contributions from interested parties create an appearance of bias, the nation's highest court ruled today.
More

SCOTUS denies Indiana wine case

May 18, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Supreme Court of the United States won't consider whether Indiana's wine shipping law is constitutional by requiring in-person contact before any direct delivery is allowed.
More

Reports: Justice to retire; speculation begins

May 1, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
Reports broke late Thursday that a Supreme Court of the United States justice plans to retire from the bench but which justice may surprise some.
More

Former justice discusses merit selection

April 22, 2009
Michael Hoskins
During a visit to South Bend today, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor pushed a message that merit selection is the best way to ensure an independent judiciary, though her words come at a time when state lawmakers are close to scrapping that very system in the county she visited.
More

Annual 7th Circuit meeting in Indy

April 21, 2009
IL Staff
United States Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and Rev. David Link, Dean Emeritus of the University of Notre Dame School of Law, are just two of the speakers at this year's Judicial Conference of the 7th Circuit and the annual meeting of the 7th Circuit Bar Association in Indianapolis.
More

SCOTUS denies cert in Indiana case

March 23, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The nation's highest court has declined to take an Indiana case asking whether a prisoner suing under the Prison Litigation Reform Act has the right to a jury trial on any debatable factual issue relating to a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
More

High court rules on self-representation issue

March 17, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's ruling that a defendant who was competent enough to stand trial wasn't competent to represent himself at trial, an issue on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States.
More

SCOTUS: Plaintiffs can sue drug companies

March 5, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The U.S. Supreme Court says pharmaceutical companies can be sued in state court over alleged drug effects, even if the Food and Drug Administration has approved the medication and its warning label.
More

SCOTUS asked to take Indiana wine case

February 9, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Supreme Court of the United States is being asked to consider the constitutionality of Indiana's wine shipping law, which requires in-person contact before any direct delivery is allowed.
More

SCOTUS: Lab techs must testify

January 1, 2009
Michael Hoskins
A decision today from the Supreme Court of the United States will have an immediate impact on Indiana, where state justices are considering at least two cases about whether lab technicians who've tested evidence in a case must appear on the stand.
More

SCOTUS urged to not take Indiana case

January 1, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Attorney General's Office wants the nation's top jurists to reject a Hoosier case posing Fourth Amendment questions about police searches, valid search warrants, and probable cause.
More

Committed woman's charge must be dismissed

December 18, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
Faced with a question the U. S. Supreme Court declined to address more than 35 years ago, the Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's decision to dismiss a criminal charge against a committed woman who may never be able to stand trial because of incompetence.
More

Federalist society to preview SCOTUS term

October 14, 2008
IL Staff
The Federalist Society's Indianapolis Lawyers Division Chapter will present a preview of the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court 2008-09 term featuring Kannon Shanmugam, who served as assistant to the solicitor general in the U.S. Department of Justice and is currently a partner in the Washington, D.C., firm Williams & Connolly.
More

Event to focus on election, U.S. Supreme Court

September 23, 2008
IL Staff
University of Notre Dame Law School professor Richard Garnett is the featured speaker at an event discussing the upcoming presidential election and its impact on the nation's highest court.
More

U.S. Chief Justice visits Notre Dame

September 12, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court visited students at the Notre Dame Law School this morning for a one-day appointment to the James J. Clynes Visiting Chair at the school.
More

Voter ID questions remain after SCOTUS ruling

May 14, 2008
Michael Hoskins
The primary election in Indiana has come and gone. Voters had to show photo identification, the same as in other recent elections, but it was the first since the nation's highest court upheld the almost three-year-old state statute requiring specific ID at the polls.
More

ACLU wants SCOTUS to hear Indiana voter ID case

May 17, 2007
Michael Hoskins
The Supreme Court of the United States is now being asked to weigh in on Indiana's two-year-old voter identification law.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 pager
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. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  2. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

  3. The story that you have shared is quite interesting and also the information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing the article. For more info: http://www.treasurecoastbailbonds.com/

  4. I grew up on a farm and live in the county and it's interesting that the big industrial farmers like Jeff Shoaf don't live next to their industrial operations...

  5. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

ADVERTISEMENT