The United States Congress’ purpose in passing the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act was not to preempt state statutes of limitations, the Indiana Supreme Court held Tuesday, so an 18-month federal statute of limitations cannot bar a transportation company’s collections claim against an Indiana manufacturer.
A former Indiana Supreme Court employee is suing the state’s highest court for alleged ongoing disability discrimination and retaliatory actions.
As the Indiana Legislature prepares to outline the state’s priorities when crafting the next biennial budget during the 2017 session, the Indiana Supreme Court is requesting a $3 million boost to support the future of court technology, one of the judiciary’s highest priorities.
From law school troubles to new court initiatives, take a look back at the top stories in Indiana Lawyer this year.
The Indiana Supreme Court Friday overturned a lower court’s decision to throw out a man’s serious violent felon charges, writing that statutes governing burglary convictions in Ohio and Indiana are “substantially” similar.
The Indiana Supreme Court has reaffirmed its decision to deny relief to a man convicted of child solicitation after granting a rehearing on that decision to correct a factual error.
The Indiana Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday as to whether officers acting on a tip had reasonable suspicion to question and arrest a man in a movie theater lobby for having a gun without a license.
Advocates for reforming Indiana’s patchwork approach to public defense for indigent Hoosiers announced they have petitioned the Indiana Supreme Court for a statewide system to remedy what they describe as an unfair, unequal and underfunded system.<
Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Loretta Rush made her case to the State Budget Committee Tuesday for additional funding in the coming fiscal years for court technology, telling committee members that the additional investment in technology now would pay off for the state down the road.
Is the act of turning on a cellphone a voluntary agreement to share that data, or do consumers have a right to privacy of the location information collected from their personal devices? The justices of the Indiana Supreme Court heard legal arguments on both sides of that issue during oral arguments in a case on Dec. 8.
When people turn on their cellphones, they have a general understanding that some data regarding their whereabouts will be collected. But if a person does not know the extent to which that data is collected, then can the court say that such data was voluntarily released by the person, or is there an expected right to privacy?
A majority of the justices of the Indiana Supreme Court found Tuesday that strict compliance with a state statute regarding contempt orders can be excused if the party in contempt has been sufficiently notified of their contempt, thus affirming a trial court decision requiring an ex-husband to produce income and tax documents for his ex-wife.
The Indiana Supreme Court has denied transfer of a case in which a father argued that the Department of Child Services’ failure to comply with the American with Disabilities Act when providing discretionary services should void the termination of his parental rights. However, two justices dissented from that decision, writing that DCS should always be required to comply with the ADA.
The effect of legislative changes to state sentencing laws was at center in oral arguments before the Indiana Supreme Court Thursday.
In oral arguments on a petition to transfer a case regarding a general contractor’s duty of care to its subcontractors, the justices of the Indiana Supreme Court considered the meaning of the phrase “monitor and implement.”
Indiana’s rules regarding chemical breath tests can be read as a recipe, with each rule laid out for the process of testing someone’s blood alcohol content meant to be followed sequentially, said the attorney for a woman challenging her misdemeanor drunken-driving charges.
The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a man’s drug conviction Tuesday, reiterating that if an officer encounters an emergency situation, then he or she may investigate further without a warrant.
Although a police officer believed that a Hamilton County woman could have been injured after being stuck under her car, the facts surrounding the situation did not lend themselves to an emergency situation that could justify the “warrantless intrusion” of stopping the woman’s car after she drove away.
The Indiana Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could decide whether beer and wine wholesalers can also be legally permitted to sell liquor in Indiana.
The justices of the Indiana Supreme Court are deciding whether to grant transfer in two cases related to the permissibility of certain police officer actions after hearing arguments on petitions to transfer Tuesday.