Of all of the things that can go wrong during a construction project, a contractual dispute is the most likely problem. A recent report found that such disputes take, on average, 18 months to resolve — an increase over 2016.
A case before the Indiana Court of Appeals is at least the third pending suit involving Rainbow Realty and its rent-to-buy program. The Indiana Attorney General filed a complaint in Marion Superior Court in January 2013, and the Fair Housing Center of Central Indiana filed a class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana in May 2017.
It was a decision that surprised few, but disappointed many. The United States Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), delivered a victory to right-to-work advocates but a blow to labor unions, holding that public sector, non-union employees cannot be forced to pay union dues.
Through SmartArb, professor Emmert hopes to provide a cheaper, more efficient method of dispute resolution for international businesses through arbitration rather than litigation. SmartArb responds to a need identified by the developing World Trade Center-Indianapolis.
Though the law has a reputation for being resistant to change, new legislation that will take effect this summer is designed to give estate planning attorneys the opportunity to embrace technology when advising clients about probate documents while allowing more traditional lawyers to conduct business as usual.
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s denial of a car dealership’s motion to set aside a default judgment for two customers when it found a dealership employee was given incorrect information about his need for representation during a hearing.
A northern Indiana recreational vehicle dealer who tried to avoid paying Indiana sales tax on out-of-state transactions by moving the RVs into Michigan before handing over the keys to customers must repay those taxes after a divided Indiana Supreme Court entered summary judgment in favor of the Indiana Department of Revenue.
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded a discovery case after it found that all but one document in dispute were either protected or non-discoverable under the work-product doctrine and attorney client privileges.
The Indiana Tax Court dismissed a case and ordered sanctions when it found a store owner committed perjury and witness tampering by attempting to influence his employees’ testimony in an investigation against him.