Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Supervised Estate of Donald L. Moster, Sr., Deceased; Lisa Voltz, Successor Personal Representative, and Donald L. Moster, Jr. v. Rose M. Deschand (mem. dec.)
Estate. Affirms on interlocutory appeal the Hamilton Superior Court order denying Lisa Voltz’s and Donald L. Moster Jr.’s motion to void the marriage between Donald L. Moster Sr. and Rose M. Deschand. The trial court found insufficient evidence of a lack mental of physical and mental capacity for Donald Sr., and the trial court did not err in denying the motion.
In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of K.M. (Minor Child) and T.M. (Mother); T.M. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination of parental rights. Affirms the Clinton Circuit Court’s order terminating mother T.M.’s parental rights to child K.M. and its denial of her motion to correct error. Finds mother’s due process rights were not violated; rejects mother’s argument that the juvenile court findings do not support its conclusion that the conditions under which the child was removed would not be remedied; and finds the court did not abuse its discretion in denying mother’s motion to correct error based on new evidence.
In the Matter of the Mi.C. (Child Alleged to be in Need of Services) and Ma.C. (Mother); Ma.C. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services and Child Advocates, Inc. (mem. dec.)
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms the Marion Superior Court’s adjudication of Mi.C. as a child in need of services, holding that the trial court’s challenged findings were supported by the evidence, and the findings support its conclusion that Mi.C. was a CHINS.
Elizabeth Gresser, Individually, John Gresser and Janice Gresser Individually and as Parents and Natural Guardians of Rebekah Gresser v. Reliable Exterminators, Inc. (mem. dec.)
Civil tort. Affirms the Tippecanoe Superior Court’s denial of a motion to correct error filed by the Gressers after a jury found in favor of Reliable Exterminators in a lawsuit alleging the Gressers’ children suffered injuries due to a pesticide application. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Gressers’ motion for a new trial, finding that as a proposed instruction may have confused or misled the jury, the appellate panel cannot say the trial court was wrong to reject it.