
Lilly lawyer is leader in patent reform
Robert Armitage nears 40 years of practicing IP-focused law.
Robert Armitage nears 40 years of practicing IP-focused law.
Some Indiana attorneys think this new first-to-file process will create a race to the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office in order to obtain patent protection first.
The Indiana Supreme Court revised the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure to allow pro se litigants and other potential clients to use limited scope representation more often and without some of the restraint they’ve had in the past.
Indiana attorneys and legislators are embarking on a broader discussion about the state’s current tort claim cap and whether that decades-old limit is adequate to address the scope of this situation.
The Supreme Court of the United States has declined to take several Indiana cases, including a criminal appeal about whether a stun belt restraint on a defendant during trial and sentencing is prejudicial.
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Commission wants the state’s highest court to find former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi committed misconduct when he made statements about two high-profile cases he handled as prosecutor.
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Commission wants the Indiana Supreme Court to find former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi committed misconduct when he made statements about two high-profile cases he handled as prosecutor.
The Indiana Court of Appeals disagrees with the state Department of Child Services that fact-finding and dispositional hearings in a child in need of services case are interchangeable. The appellate panel has ruled a Marion County father’s due process rights were denied because he didn’t receive the opportunity for a fact-finding hearing.
The state’s intermediate appellate court has reversed a southern Indiana judge’s ruling that a boyfriend should retain visitation rights over an ex-girlfriend’s child. It ruled that the finding is contrary to law because lawmakers didn’t allow for that type of circumstance to warrant visitation.
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Board of Law Examiners is cutting one controversial question from its annual bar exam application and will revise another in order to comply with a federal judge’s recent ruling.
A long-debated patent reform law is now in place, signaling the most significant change to the system in nearly six decades.
In an order released Sept. 14, the Indiana Supreme Court detailed the process for obtaining bulk distribution of and remote access to the records of Indiana courts using the Odyssey case management system, which is gradually connecting all of Indiana’s trial courts.
The six-year casino revenue litigation that sparked multiple lawsuits statewide, went to Indiana’s appellate courts multiple times, and led to legislative initiatives is coming to a close.
Emphasizing that it’s not trampling on the Fourth Amendment and allowing police to illegally enter one’s home, the Indiana Supreme Court has revisited a case it decided four months ago and reinforced its ruling that residents don’t have a common law right to resist police entering one’s home.
The consolidation is a byproduct of the state judiciary’s reform efforts.
Multiple new rule changes will begin next year for the state’s court system, which were announced in a slew of Indiana Supreme Court orders released earlier in the week.
A federal judge has found that one of the Indiana bar exam application questions violates the Americans with Disabilities Act because it infringes on potential lawyers’ privacy rights.