Court opinions

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael A. Conley Sr. v. USA Track & Field Inc.
25A-CT-2995

Civil tort. Interlocutory appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge Christina R. Klineman. Affirms the denial of Michael A. Conley Sr.’s motion to compel arbitration in a dispute with USA Track & Field Inc. stemming from allegations that Conley breached his fiduciary duties as board chairman during the 2024 Olympic marathon trials bidding process. Holds that USATF’s bylaw requiring arbitration applies only to controversies involving its recognition as a national governing body, and Conley’s alleged misconduct — including communications and coordination with a board member tied to a disqualified bid — does not constitute such a controversy. Concludes that resolution of USATF’s claims against Conley will not affect USATF’s recognition status and therefore does not trigger mandatory arbitration. Judge Mathias authored the opinion. Judges May and Felix concur. Appellant attorneys: Daniel R. Kelley, Nicholas R. Burris, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP; Deirdre A. Close, Croke, Fairchild, Duarte & Beres LLP. Appellee attorneys: Jonathan D. Mattingly, Hamish S. Cohen, Brian R. Weir-Harden, Jeffrey N. Furminger, Mattingly Burke Cohen & Biederman LLP.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Close Armstrong, LLC, et al. v. Trunkline Gas Company, LLC
24-1630

Civil. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Damon R. Leichty. Denies the petition for rehearing and issues minor amendments to its March 31, 2026 opinion. Holds the panel unanimously voted to deny rehearing and clarifies language describing the landowners’ suit to define and limit the scope of an easement and the procedural history of consolidated cases that resulted in partial summary judgment for Trunkline. Circuit Judge Easterbrook, Circuit Judge Jackson-Akiwumi and Circuit Judge Maldonado were on the panel.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Tradewinds Holding Company, Inc. v. CPUS Anson Building 8A, LP
No. 25A-PL-347

Appeal from Boone Superior Court, Judge Matthew C. Kincaid. Tradewinds Holding Company, Inc. appealed the Boone Superior Court’s partial summary judgment in favor of CPUS Anson Building 8A, LP, which found Tradewinds breached their lease agreement. The trial court awarded Anson over $3.5 million in damages, along with attorney fees and post-judgment interest. The appellate court affirmed Tradewinds’ breach of contract but found that the trial court erred in its damages calculation. The case was remanded for a recalculation of the damages owed by Tradewinds, specifically addressing the timeline for when rents and associated costs became due. Judge Scheele authored the opinion, with Judges Brown and Felix concurring. Appellants’ attorney: Alexander P. Pinegar, Church Church Hittle + Antrim, Noblesville, Indiana. Appellees’ attorneys: Jenny R. Buchheit, Robert A. Jorczak, Christina L. Fugate, Adam M. Alexander, Ice Miller LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana. This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Tax Court
United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue
No. 24T-TA-00018

This case addresses whether fuel used by UPS vehicles on private roads is exempt from Indiana’s Special Fuel Tax as fuel used for “nonhighway purposes.” The Indiana Department of State Revenue denied UPS’s refund claims for special fuel tax paid, arguing that fuel consumed on private roads was related to highway operations. The Court found the plain meaning of the statutory language supports that fuel used on private roads falls under the exemption for nonhighway purposes, noting that such usage is distinct from public highway use. Consequently, the Court granted partial summary judgment in favor of UPS, affirming that the fuel consumed on private roads is exempt from the tax. Judge Justin L. McAdam authored the opinion. Petitioners’ attorneys: Maggie L. Smith, Darren A. Craig, FBT Gibbons, Indianapolis, Indiana; and Daniel G. Mudd, FBT Gibbons, Louisville, Kentucky. Respondent’s attorneys: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Kayla Smiley v. Katie Jenner
No. 23-2543

Civil. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Judge James P. Hanlon. Affirms the district court’s denial of Smiley’s motion for a preliminary injunction against Indiana’s law prohibiting instruction on human sexuality for students in pre-kindergarten through third grade. The court concluded Smiley did not demonstrate a likelihood of success on her First or Fourteenth Amendment claims, stating that the law does not significantly infringe on protected speech and is not unconstitutionally vague. Judge Scudder authored the opinion. Judges Jackson-Akiwumi and Pryor concur.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Jeffrey Haskins v. Financial Builders Federal Credit Union
No. 25A-PL-1810

Civil. Appeal from the Howard Superior Court, Judge Ryan D. Washburn, Judge Pro Tempore. Affirms the trial court’s grant of Financial Builders Federal Credit Union’s motion to dismiss Haskins’ claim for overdraft fees as time-barred. The court concludes that Haskins’ claim, arising from overdraft fees charged more than two years prior to filing, is subject to the two-year limitations period for actions upon a deposit account as defined under Indiana law. Judge Scheele authored the opinion. Judges Brown and Felix concur. Appellant’s attorneys: Lynn A. Toops, Gabriel A. Hawkins, Lisa M. LaFornara, Cohen & Malad, LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Finis Tatum IV, Janet L. Thompson, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana. Amici curiae attorneys: Libby Y. Goodknight, Brett J. Ashton, Krieg DeVault LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Exploration Center I, LLC, et al. v. Metropolitan Development Commission of Marion County, Indiana
No. 25A-PL-977

Civil. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge Timothy Wayne Oakes. Reverses the trial court’s grant of the Commission’s motion to dismiss Republic’s appeal regarding the termination of a tax abatement. The court finds that the statutory requirement for the appeal to be determined within 30 days is directory rather than mandatory, allowing for the appeal to proceed despite the delay. Judge Altice authored the opinion. Judges May and Foley concur. Appellant’s attorneys: Stephen M. Judge, Vienna M. Bottomley, South Bend, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Jess Reagan Gastineau, Michael Brian Coppinger, Indianapolis, Indiana.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of G.V. and A.V., Children in Need of Services, and M.V., (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services, et al.
No. 25A-JC-1223

Juvenile. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge Geoffrey A. Gaither. Affirms the trial court’s determination that G.V. is a Child in Need of Services (CHINS) and the dispositional decree continuing her removal from Mother’s care. The court found sufficient evidence that G.V. was seriously endangered, given Mother’s conduct, including physical discipline of A.V. and inconsistent explanations for G.V.’s injuries. It also concluded that coercive intervention was necessary to ensure G.V.’s safety as Mother had not shown cooperation with required interventions. Judge DeBoer authored the opinion. Judges Bradford and Weissmann concur. Appellant’s attorneys: Talisha Griffin, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana; Suzy St. John, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law Appellate Clinic, Indianapolis, Indiana; Sarah Y. Faulkner, Certified Legal Intern, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Gbenga Afolabi v. State of Indiana
No. 24A-CR-3081

Criminal. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge Angela Dow Davis. Affirms Afolabi’s convictions of two counts of rape, one count of attempted rape, five counts of sexual misconduct and others, but remands for vacating one intimidation conviction due to substantive double jeopardy with the rape conviction involving one victim. Holds that sufficient evidence exists to support the conviction for the rape of another victim, and procedural and evidentiary decisions by the trial court did not constitute reversible error. Judge Weissmann authored the opinion. Judges Bradford and DeBoer concur. Appellant’s attorney: Stacy R. Uliana, Bargersville, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

The following opinion was issued on April 13 after The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline. 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
John Doe v. University of Southern Indiana, et al.
No. 24-2245

Civil. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt. Affirms the district court’s denial of John Doe’s request to litigate under a pseudonym. The court found that Doe failed to show a substantial risk of physical harm or retaliation, noting that past threats were old and unsubstantiated by current evidence of danger. The court reiterated the strong presumption against allowing pseudonyms for adult parties and declined to expand that standard to include mental health concerns. Judge Hamilton authored the opinion. Judges Brennan and St. Eve concur.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Marco Antono Perez, II v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-2377

Criminal. Appeal from the Vermillion Circuit Court, Judge Chris A. Wrede. Reverses and remands. Holds the trial court abused its discretion by ordering Perez to serve the entirety of his previously suspended sentence based on two technical probation violations — failing to attend scheduled appointments — given his otherwise successful compliance, lack of new offenses and mitigating circumstances; the court concludes the sanction was disproportionate and that lesser sanctions should be considered. Chief Judge Tavitas authored the opinion. Judges Weissmann and Foley concur. Appellant’s attorney: Aaron J. Spolarich, Bennett Boehning & Clary LLP, Lafayette, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Civil Commitment of L.F. v. Sandra Eskenazi Mental Health Center
26A-MH-658

Mental health. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge David J. Certo. Affirms temporary commitment of L.F. for up to 90 days, finding sufficient evidence to support both the commitment and a treatment plan requiring medication over her objection. Police took L.F., who has schizophrenia, to Eskenazi after finding her standing in traffic. While hospitalized, she exhibited delusions, assaulted another patient and resisted medication. On appeal, L.F. argued the commitment was inappropriate because it allowed forced medication without sufficient evidence under In re Mental Commitment of M.P. The Court of Appeals held the record showed that an individualized assessment found that the medication (Abilify) would substantially benefit her condition, that the benefits outweighed risks and her concerns, and that alternative treatments were considered and rejected. The court found clear and convincing evidence supported overriding her refusal of medication and the commitment order. Judge Weissmann authored the opinion. Judges Brown and Foley concurred. Appellant’s attorney: Sarah Medlin, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis. Appellee’s attorneys: Bryan H. Babb and Seema R. Shah, Bose McKinney & Evans LLP.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Supreme Court 
Keith D. Harper v. S&H Leasing, LLC; K&K Real Estate Holdings, LLC; Thomas Hagen; Brian Brisco; and Jeremy Noetzel
26S-PL-111

Civil. Appeal from the Elkhart Superior Court, Judge Stephen R. Bowers. Affirms the trial court’s judgment awarding treble damages under the Crime Victim’s Relief Act, ruling that money does not need to be considered “special chattel” for a civil claim of criminal conversion. The Supreme Court said the definition of a crime for the purposes of a Crime Victim’s Relief Act award is limited to its statutory elements. And it concluded that Harper knowingly exerted unauthorized control over the disputed funds he transferred to his personal accounts for his benefit. Justice Slaughter authored the opinion. Chief Justice Rush and Justices Massa, Goff and Molter concur. Appellant’s attorney: Adam J. Sedia, Johnson & Bell P.C., Crown Point, Indiana. Appellees’ attorneys: James M. Lewis, Elizabeth A. Klesmith, THK Law LLP, South Bend, Indiana.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Supreme Court
Regina Geels v. Lindsay Flottemesch, Mackenzi Hatfield, and Stephanie Malinowski as Guardian for Marley Malinowski
No. 25S-PL-225

Civil. Appeal from the Allen Superior Court, Judge David J. Avery. Affirms the trial court’s imposition of a constructive trust over life-insurance proceeds in favor of the decedent’s daughters. Holds the defendant waived her Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)-preemption defense by failing to raise it at the trial-court level and could not rely on a co-defendant’s assertion of the defense or the parties’ stipulation that ERISA governed the policies; the court further concludes the trial court did not clearly err in finding a fiduciary relationship and breach of fiduciary duty, supporting imposition of a constructive trust under a clear-and-convincing-evidence standard. Justice Goff authored the opinion. Chief Justice Rush and Justice Massa and Justice Molter concur. Justice Slaughter dissents, stating he would deny transfer and allow the Court of Appeals’ decision to stand. Appellant’s attorney: Robert J. Palmer, May Oberfell Lorber, LLP, Mishawaka, Indiana. Appellees’ attorneys: Nathan S.J. Williams, Shannon K. Connors, Shambaugh Kast Beck & Williams, LLP, Fort Wayne, Indiana.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Justin Gordon and Kierston Cates v. Terex Corp., Terex USA LLC, Terex South Dakota Inc., Genie Industries Inc., and General Rental & Sales LLC
25A-CT-2275

Civil. Appeal from the Pike Circuit Court, Judge Evan C. Biesterveld. Affirms the trial court’s dismissal of appellants’ suit with prejudice, holding that their failure to timely submit required summonses meant the lawsuit was not properly commenced under Indiana Trial Rule 3. The court determined that appellants’ alleged right to voluntarily dismiss without prejudice was not applicable since they failed to meet the necessary requirements for adjudication. Judge Bradford authored the opinion. Judges Pyle and Kenworthy concur. Appellants’ attorneys: Jason E. Pepe, Patrick Daniel Law, Houston, Texas; Bradley P. Colborn, Colborn Law, Granger, Indiana. Appellee General Rental’s attorney: Robert R. Foos, Jr., Lewis Wagner & Trimble, Indianapolis. Appellees Terex’s attorneys: Kevin C. Schiferl, Maggie L. Smith, Jordan M. Slusher, FBT Gibbons, Indianapolis.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals 
V.K. and T.K. (Minor Children), Children in Need of Services, and A.R. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services
25A-JC-2395

Juvenile. Appeal from the Perry Circuit Court, Judge Lucy Goffinet. Affirms the trial court’s dispositional order requiring mother to submit to random drug screens and abstain from alcohol. Holds that the mother waived her challenge to these requirements by failing to object to the recommendations in the predispositional report during the dispositional hearing. Additionally, the court finds sufficient evidence supports the imposition of these requirements based on the parents’ history of domestic violence and substance abuse. Judge Kenworthy authored the opinion. Judges Bradford and Pyle concur.  Appellant’s attorney: Cara Schaefer Wieneke, Wieneke Law Office LLC, Brooklyn, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Indiana Attorney General’s Office.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael Watters v. Brandi Cole
No. 25A-CT-1703

Civil. Appeal from the Franklin Circuit Court, Judge Alex J. Dudley. Affirms the trial court’s judgment in favor of Cole. Holds the trial court did not clearly err in finding Watters made fraudulent misrepresentations, including falsely claiming extensive experience in the pool industry and failing to disclose material facts about subcontracting, which Cole relied upon in entering the contract; the court further concludes the trial court properly pierced the corporate veil because Allure Pools was undercapitalized, used to promote fraud or injustice and had no assets, making it equitable to hold Watters personally liable. Judge May authored the opinion. Judges Mathias and Felix concur. Appellant’s attorneys: Taylor Ferguson, Andrew Dutkanych III, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: Joseph M. Sprafka III, Reardon & Chasar, LPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

The following opinion was issued on March 31 after The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline. 

Indiana Tax Court
New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC v. Indiana Department of State Revenue
No. 24T-TA-00004

Tax. Appeal from the Indiana Department of State Revenue. Grants in part and denies in part the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Holds that under Indiana Code § 6-2.5-5-13, the phrase “radio or microwave transmitting or receiving equipment” includes cell phones based on its plain and ordinary meaning, and rejects the Department’s attempt to limit the exemption to central network infrastructure or equipment under the provider’s custody and control; the court further concludes New Cingular qualifies as the “person acquiring the property” for purposes of the exemption because the relevant acquisition is its purchase of the phones from suppliers, making its use of the phones exempt from use tax, but denies summary judgment on the refund amount due to unresolved factual issues. Judge McAdam authored the opinion. Petitioner’s attorney: Benjamin Blair, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana. Respondent’s attorneys: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Travis S. Chandler v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-2553

Criminal. Appeal from the Brown Circuit Court, Judge Mary Wertz. Affirms the denial of Chandler’s petition to file a belated appeal and remands with instructions to permit a belated notice of appeal. Holds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief under Post-Conviction Rule 2 because belated appeals are not available for probation revocation orders under controlling Indiana Supreme Court precedent; however, concludes extraordinarily compelling reasons justify resurrecting Chandler’s forfeited appeal where he timely communicated his desire to appeal, the failure resulted from counsel not hearing him, and he acted diligently once the issue was discovered. Judge Felix authored the opinion. Judges May and Mathias concur. Appellant’s attorney: Kurt A. Young, Nashville, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.