To refine your search through our archives use our Advanced Search
The lawsuit seeks a ruling that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem violated the First Amendment after they allegedly “strong-armed” Apple to remove an app developed by a company founded by a Brown County resident.
The man was accused of robbing a Burger King on North Shadeland Avenue in Indianapolis with a handgun, then leading police on a chase into Hamilton County.
Indiana Court of Appeals
John Sayre and Sam the Concrete Man v. Lee Trost
No. 25A-PL-1007
Civil. Appeal from the Hamilton Superior Court, Judge Darren J. Murphy. Affirms the trial court’s judgment in favor of Lee Trost following a bench trial on claims arising from the installation of a concrete patio. Holds the evidence supports the trial court’s findings that the contractors breached the parties’ agreement and performed deficient and negligent work, including pouring mismatched concrete, incorrectly re-pouring sections, failing to complete the project within the contemplated timeframe, and leaving multiple defects and hazards unresolved nearly two years after the contract was executed. Further holds the trial court did not err in awarding $19,961 in damages, including return of the $7,425 deposit, $200 for drain and fence repairs, $836 for patio removal and $11,500 for replacement, where the court found the patio must be torn out and replaced, the existing work devalued the property, and the damages were within the scope of the evidence and necessary to compensate Trost for the loss of the benefit of the bargain. Judge Felix dissented, concluding the trial court erred by entering judgment on Trost’s negligence claim because the contractors’ duty arose solely from the contract and there was no invasion of interests beyond a breach of contractual obligations. He also concluded the trial court improperly awarded the full replacement cost of the patio, reasoning that while Trost was entitled to recover his deposit, repair costs and removal expenses, paying for an entirely new patio placed him in a better position than he would have occupied absent the breach. He would affirm the breach-of-contract finding, reverse the negligence judgment, and remand for a redetermination of damages, including any consequential damages proven with reasonable certainty. Appellant’s attorney: Jeffrey K. Eicher. Appellee’s attorney: Julie A. Camden. This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.
Republican lawmakers are divided over limiting disease spread versus arguments of enabling drug abuse.
The pullback from L.A., Chicago and Portland raises questions about the administration’s plan to create a quick reaction force of National Guard members designated to deploy into any area experiencing civil unrest.
The affidavit provides the first public justification for an FBI search last month that targeted a county Trump and his allies have long seen as central to their claim that the 2020 election was stolen.
Some House Democrats initially opposed House Bill 1249 over concerns that it would take away judges’ discretion in youth handgun cases.
New data show the Indiana Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force received 29,635 cyber tips in 2025 — a 38% increase over the prior year — and has already logged nearly 3,000 tips in early 2026.
Todd Lyons, the acting head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, was one of the three heads of agencies implementing President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda to testify before Congress on Tuesday.
Jurors in a landmark social media case that seeks to hold tech companies responsible for harms to children got their first glimpse into what will be a lengthy trial characterized by dueling narratives from the plaintiffs and the two remaining defendants, Meta and YouTube.
Though details are scarce and officials say they haven’t received word of any formal plans, Merrillville leaders have recently come out in opposition to reports that Immigration and Customs Enforcement could use an area warehouse as a processing facility.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Denitra Jones v. Full Spectrum Property Management
No. 25A-EV-532
Civil. Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court, Magistrate Kevin M. Eads. Reverses the trial court’s order granting possession of rental property to Full Spectrum Property Management and awarding damages, attorney fees, and costs, and remands with instructions to reinstate Jones’ counterclaim. Holds the landlord failed to carry its burden of proof on its breach-of-contract and possession claims and that the trial court improperly shifted the burden to Jones by relying on her equivocal testimony rather than requiring the landlord to present evidence of lease terms, arrearage calculations, and statutory notice of termination. Further holds the conduct of the possession hearing denied Jones due process of law where the proceeding began under the assumption the landlord was entitled to possession, Jones was not afforded a meaningful opportunity to present defenses — including habitability and notice arguments — and no landlord representative testified. Concludes the trial court erred by prospectively declaring Jones’ personal property abandoned and disposable before she vacated the premises. Further concludes the trial court mishandled Jones’ counterclaim by questioning its validity, failing to follow small claims procedures regarding service, and effectively dismissing it without a meaningful hearing. Appellant’s attorneys: Megan Stuart; Jennifer W. Terry; Renee Skeete. Appellee: No appellee’s brief filed.
This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.
After hours of emotional testimony from frustrated parents and school leaders, an Indiana House committee is weighing whether to revive youth social media restrictions inside a wide-ranging education agency bill.
A bill advancing in the state Senate would increase disclosure requirements to legislators and news media.
Federal judges around the country are scrambling to address a deluge of lawsuits from immigrants locked up under the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.
But if they lose, social media companies will face pressure to change the way minors interact with social media and to reach settlements that could total billions – a scenario that could be akin to the deals that tarnished the tobacco and opioid industries.
IYG, a group that supports LGBTQ+ youth and young adults, said in a news release that the move comes despite two public hearings producing hours of testimony in opposition.
Attorney General Todd Rokita announced the settlement Monday, just over a year after filing an antitrust lawsuit against Pfizer Inc., Viatris Inc. and several other companies that distribute injectable epinephrine devices.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Ilene Breuning and Christine Morgan, as Co-Trustees of the Willi Breuning and Ilene Breuning Living Trust Agreement v. Tim W. Breuning
No. 25A-TR-1491
Civil. Interlocutory appeal from the Allen Superior Court, Judge Jennifer L. DeGroote. Reverses the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of trust beneficiary Tim W. Breuning and remands with instructions to enter summary judgment for co-trustees Ilene Breuning and Christine Morgan. Holds that Section 1.2 of the unambiguous trust agreement preserved the tenancy-by-the-entireties character of real property transferred into the trust and retained for the surviving settlor all rights, privileges and obligations as if the property were held free of the trust until the deaths of both settlors. Concludes that, upon Willi Breuning’s death, title to the property vested in Ilene Breuning by operation of law through survivorship, and that this specific provision controls over the general distribution provision in Section 5.1 governing the remaining trust estate. Determines the trial court erred by treating the property as part of the residuary trust estate subject to equal distribution. Appellants’ attorneys: Stephen J. Harants. Appellee’s attorney: Kent C. Litchin.
This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.
A panel on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to deny bond hearings to arrested immigrants is consistent with the Constitution and federal immigration law.
