To refine your search through our archives use our Advanced Search
A man can keep the $25,000 deposit paid to him after a real estate sale did not through, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday. The contract the parties entered into was enforceable and did not specify financing as part of the sale.
The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled a woman seek to modify a divorce agreement after she found her husband hid more than $1 million in undisclosed assets five years later.
A group of New England Patriots fans have sued the NFL in an effort to recover the first-round draft pick taken from the team as punishment for the "Deflategate" scandal.
Defendants in a civil forfeiture complaint lodged earlier this year in Marion Superior Court have filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds the plaintiffs and the court lack standing.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Larry J. Jernas and R & R Horse Haven, Inc. v. Kevin J. Gumz
75A03-1511-CC-1903
Civil collection. Affirms Kevin Gumz can keep $25,000 deposit after sale of real estate did not go through. Rejects claims the agreement was invalid because it was indefinite or not properly executed.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a prisoner can seek remedies against prison staff who did not protect him from other inmates who were throwing feces at him. It found the man had exhausted all of his remedies before filing suit.
The 7th Circuit affirmed that Indiana was immune from a Federal Labor Standards Act lawsuit brought by two Department of Child Services Employees. The court said the state did not give consent for the suit, and thus had 11th Amendment immunity under the U.S. Constitution.
An Indiana State Police trooper faces a second lawsuit accusing him of preaching his faith to citizens while on duty.
A man who moved back to Indiana in 2013 after he was convicted of child molesting in 1989 must still register as a sex offender, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. His registration does not cause an ex post facto violation nor place an additional punishment on him.
The legal fight to shield Indiana lawmakers from having to release email correspondence with lobbying groups has cost taxpayers at least $160,000.
A security company isn't liable for the theft of more than $60 million worth of prescription drugs from pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly's warehouse in Connecticut six years ago, a federal jury in Florida says.
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled a city did not meet the requirements of the Indiana Tort Claims Act, and as such does not have immunity in a suit filed by a woman who fell in a city street and broke her leg.
The Indiana Supreme Court said admission of an autopsy report and testimony by a pathologist who did not complete the report was not a violation of a man’s Sixth Amendment right to cross-examination and thus affirmed the trial court’s conviction of second-degree murder.
The Indiana Court of Appeals dismissed a motion for preliminary injunction against the state’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit filed by Pain Medicine and Rehabilitation Center and Anthony Alexander after it found PMRC’s motion in the trial court was not procedurally correct.
Indiana Supreme Court
Michael Ackerman v. State of Indiana
49S00-1409-CR-770
Criminal. Affirms Michael Ackerman’s conviction and sentence for second-degree murder. He was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. The court found an admission of an autopsy report into evidence does not violate the defendant’s right to confront witnesses against him when the pathologist who performed the autopsy against him was not available to testify.
The Indiana Court of Appeals reduced a man’s aggregate sentence by three years after it found he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his counsel did not bring up a statutory limitation issue.
The lawyers at the center of an uproar over the hidden financial dealings of the world's wealthy are an odd pairing of a German-born immigrant and a prize-winning Panamanian novelist whose books sometimes mirror the seedy world of politics he's come across in his work.
At issue in the case is how the government uses evidence derived through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and under what circumstances that information should be made available to defendants, particularly when it winds up repurposed for a routine criminal prosecution that has nothing to do with national security.
On Tuesday, a Muslim civil rights group filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court in Alexandria on behalf of thousands of Americans who have been placed on the terror watch list. The suit seeks unspecified monetary compensation.
A review of sexual misconduct cases overseen by Indiana University's former student ethics director, who resigned in February amid sex assault allegations that he denies, found that those cases "were conducted without bias or undue influence," the school said Monday.