Sept. 24, 2026 - The Indiana Lawyer

Listen to this story

0:00

Loading audio file, please wait.

0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00

Indiana Court of Appeals

U.S. Bank National Association v. Bradford W. Raths et al.

No. 25A-MF-1692

Appeal from Hendricks Superior Court, Judge Rhett M. Stuard. The court affirmed the trial court’s summary judgment favoring Raths, determining that U.S. Bank’s attempt to foreclose on the mortgage was barred by the statute of limitations, as the underlying debt had been barred for well over a decade. The court found that because Indiana law stipulates a mortgage cannot be enforced once the debt is barred, U.S. Bank, having waited eighteen years without enforcing its rights on the prior judgment, could not proceed against Raths as the current property owner. The court emphasized that allowing the foreclosure would be unjust given the time elapsed and the investments made by parties in the property. Judge May authored the opinion, with Judges Altice and Foley concurring. Appellant attorney: Jason E. Duhn, Diaz Anselmo & Associates, LLC, Fort Lauderdale, FL. Appellee attorney: Tammy L. Ortman, Ortman Law, LLC, Greenfield.

The following opinions were filed Sept. 23.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Judiann Miskulin, M.D., v. Otolaryngology Associates, LLC
No. 25A-PL-2078
Appeal from Marion Superior Court, Indiana Commercial Court, Judge Christina R. Klineman. The court affirmed the Indiana Commercial Court’s summary judgment in favor of Otolaryngology Associates, LLC, finding no merit in Dr. Miskulin’s tortious interference claim regarding her terminated employment contract with Community Network. The court determined that Dr. Miskulin failed to show that OA intentionally induced a breach of her contract and noted that the evidence supported OA’s actions as justified business decisions made by Community Network, as well as a lack of malicious intent. Judge May authored the opinion, with Judges Mathias and Felix concurring. Appellant attorneys: Kathleen A. DeLaney and Alexander J. Pantos, DeLaney & DeLaney, LLC, Indianapolis. Appellee attorneys: John R. Maley and Kevin Roberts, Barnes & Thornburg, LLP, Indianapolis.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Marquel Jamar Wattley v. State of Indiana
No. 26A-CR-979
Appeal from Allen Superior Court, Magistrate Samuel Keirns. Marquel Jamar Wattley appealed the trial court’s decision to revoke his probation and impose the entirety of his previously suspended four-year sentence following his admission of probation violations. The court found that these violations occurred during a documented mental-health crisis, which included an involuntary commitment for schizophrenia. The Court of Appeals determined that the trial court abused its discretion by not considering sanctions commensurate with Wattley’s violations and previous mental health challenges. The court reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded the case for consideration of alternative sanctions focusing on Wattley’s compliance with mental health treatment. Judge Vaidik authored the opinion, with Chief Judge Tavitas and Judge May concurring. Attorney for appellant: Thomas C. Allen, Fort Wayne. Attorney for appellee: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

Indiana Tax Court

Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Madison County Assessor

No. 25T-TA-00020

Nestlé USA, Inc. appealed a final determination by the Indiana Board of Tax Review regarding the property tax assessments for its industrial facility over six tax years. The Board favored the assessment provided by the Madison County Assessor for 2018, 2022, and 2023, but it reverted to the 2018 assessments for 2019 to 2021 due to a failure to meet the burden of proof standards set forth in the now-repealed burden-shifting statute. Nestlé challenged the Board’s application of this statute and the sufficiency of the evidence used to support the Assessor’s values. The court found that the Board applied the statute correctly, based its findings on substantial evidence, and did not abuse its discretion, ultimately affirming the Board’s decision in full. Judge McAdam authored the opinion. Attorneys for petitioner: Paul M. Jones, Jr., Brigham E. Michaud, Jones Pyatt Law, LLC, Greenwood, IN; attorneys for respondent: Brian A. Cusimano, Marilyn S. Meighen, Zachary D. Price, Carmel, IN, Indianapolis, IN.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Subscriber Benefit

Get full access to The Indiana Lawyer!

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Your go-to for Indy business news.