To refine your search through our archives use our Advanced Search
A police officer who lied to a woman in order to gain entry into her home was not lawfully engaged in the execution of his duties, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday, so the judges reversed a woman’s resisting law enforcement conviction.
The owners of a southern Indiana general store accused in a federal lawsuit of selling knockoff high-end Coach-brand products may not represent pro se their incorporated general store named in the suit.
Indiana Court of Appeals
John R. Pugsley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
05A02-1306-CR-517
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of methamphetamine and Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia.
Derek A. Griffith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
89A01-1307-PC-300
Post conviction. Affirms denial of relief from convictions of Class C felony attempted burglary and finding of habitual offender.
Mark A. Petry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
63A01-1306-CR-279
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony criminal deviate conduct, Class D felony sexual battery and Class D felony criminal confinement.
James R. Willey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
06A05-1306-PC-268
Post conviction. Affirms in part and reverses in part denial of relief from convictions of felony murder and conspiracy to commit burglary, vacating a 50-year sentence on the latter charge because trial counsel failed to raise the argument that the convictions violated the prohibition against double jeopardy.
In Re the Visitation of L.W., D.W. v. G.W. and C.W. (NFP)
71A03-1308-JM-300
Juvenile. Dismisses as moot father D.W.’s appeal of a grandparent visitation order.
Angelo A. Liali v. Patsy Liali (NFP)
34A02-1307-DR-640
Affirms order denying Angelo Liali’s motion to modify college support obligation and affirms indirect contempt finding for refusal to pay.
Joshua Batchelor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1305-CR-274
Criminal. Affirms order denying release of cash bond and money seized in a search of Batchelor’s home.
Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court issued no opinions by IL deadline. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
James Kindred, Thomas Kindred, and Sam Kindred v. Betty Townsend and Harmon Crone
60A01-1304-PL-156
Civil plenary. Dismisses interlocutory appeal as untimely. Finds the arguments the Kindreds raised in appealing the denial of their motion to dissolve were based on information that was available when the trial court granted the preliminary injunction six months prior. Still, the COA notes it has ruled only that the Kindreds forfeited their right to an interlocutory appeal by failing to timely file. The Kindreds may yet attack the trial court’s interlocutory orders on appeal from the final judgment.
The sentence of a man convicted of killing his ex-wife was reduced by 50 years Tuesday when the Indiana Court of Appeals granted in part his petition for post-conviction relief.
A bill introduced to restore Indiana Wesleyan University's workforce training contract with the state quickly turned into a debate about religious discrimination. The measure, which would have amended Indiana's civil rights law to allow religious institutions doing buisness with the state to make employment decisions based in part on religious affiliation, was pulled from consideration by the full House of Representatives Monday afternoon, but not before debate over the issue erupted on Twitter. IBJ has the story.
In dismissing an interlocutory appeal as untimely, the Indiana Court of Appeals told the appellants they still have the ability to attack the trial court’s interlocutory orders.
A core aspect of the IndyBar Bar Leader Series is the development and execution of a community service team projects by series participants. This facet of the program gives participants a unique opportunity to take community engagement a step further by putting the knowledge and skills that they’ve learned in the series to practical use for the benefit of the community.
In the newest installment of the IndyBar Professionalism Committee’s Pause for Professionalism video series, Marion County Deputy Prosecutor Kathy Infanger explains the purpose and role of the Marion County Community Court.
Save time and find the legislation that matters to you and your practice. The IndyBar’s weekly Bill Watch reports are now being broken down into practice-area specific posts that highlight the pending bills of particular concern to different sections within the bar.
One thing that we constantly hear from other organizations is how forward thinking and progressive the IndyBar is compared to other bar associations in the country. We received requests from other bar execs for their officers to spend time with us and “pick our brains” on how to successfully manage and operate a bar association.
The Indianapolis Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Professionalism is pleased to acknowledge the professionalism and civility of Katherine Flood of Flood Family Law LLC and Tricia Milanese of Milanese Law LLC.
The Indianapolis Bar Association continues to support efforts to explore all opportunities to create a safe, adequate and dignified justice center for Marion County.
The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates that there are approximately 65,000 military veterans living in Marion County. These veterans face unique challenges during and after reintegration into the community. While the veteran homelessness rate has begun to decline since 2009 in response to growing government efforts, veterans still make up about 13 percent of the […]
Read who’s recently joined Indiana firms or been honored for his or her work in the community.
The DTCI’s flagship publication, the Indiana Civil Litigation Review, will be distributed soon. Members and subscribers can anticipate another issue full of valuable information and analyses by leaders of Indiana’s defense bar.
In June 2013, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman, is unconstitutional. In essence, the court held that the Act denied same-sex couples the “equal liberty” guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. This decision has far broader impact than just the scope of the estate-tax issues raised in the case, and employers and benefit providers should be aware of the impact and aftermath of this ruling.