COA concerned about some details in termination case
In affirming the involuntary termination of a mother’s parental rights, the Indiana Court of Appeals noted some troubling
details involving the case.
Judge Nancy H. Vaidik
Articles
Judges split in adopted trust-beneficiaries matter
In an issue of first impression regarding the retroactivity of a 2003 amendment to the state’s trust code, the Indiana
Court of Appeals was divided on whether adopted children should have been included as beneficiaries of a trust.
Booking card exception to hearsay rule
A booking card created by law enforcement in the course of a ministerial, nonevaluative booking process is not subject to
the police reports exclusion under Indiana Evidence Rule 803(8), the Indiana Court of Appeals decided today.
COA upholds stop of teen with gun
The Indiana Court of Appeals found the stop by police of a teen at a summer expo in Indianapolis who had a loaded gun in his
waistband didn’t violate the teen’s state or federal constitutional rights. The appellate court also concluded
the juvenile court’s comments to the teen’s father don’t require a remand.
Judges: no private cause allowed for not reporting abuse, neglect
Standing behind a decision made by appellate judges about 20 years ago, the Indiana Court of Appeals has again declined to
interpret state statute in a way that allows for a private right of action for failing to report child abuse or neglect.
COA: No presumption of undue influence
A 2005 amendment to Indiana Code sets aside the common law presumption of undue influence with respect to certain transactions
benefiting an attorney in fact, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today on an issue of first impression.
COA: Just running red light not reckless
Ruling on the issue for the first time, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that not stopping at an intersection cannot, without more evidence, constitute criminally reckless conduct and establish a prima facie case.
Judges differ in stipulation matter
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed on whether a defendant pleaded guilty to the enhancement of his auto theft conviction based on his previous conviction for a similar crime.
Judges disagree as how to review sentence
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges affirmed today that a defendant's sentence following a guilty plea wasn't inappropriate, but the judges didn't agree as to how to reach that conclusion.
Judges disagree on statute’s constitutionality
In an issue with great relevance given today's advances in technology and social networking, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded someone who uses a computer to download an electronic image and save it on a CD doesn't "create" a digitalized image under the child-exploitation statute.
Trial court erred in denying motion to continue
A Marion Superior trial court should have granted a woman's motion to continue the day of her bench trial because she had a constitutional right to present a defense to support her involuntary intoxication argument, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided today.
COA affirms ruling in ‘unusual’ termination case
In an unusual case on appeal in which a mother's parental rights were terminated to only one of her five children during a termination hearing, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the decision due to the circumstances of the case.
Judges disagree on intent issue in rape trial
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed as to whether a defendant in a rape case put his intent at issue during trial by attempting to show his victim consented to sex with him.
Officer safety justified opening ajar car door
The opening of an ajar car door by a police officer during a foot chase with a suspected robber didn't violate the man's federal or state constitutional rights, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded today.
Judges uphold contingent fees award
The contingent fee contract a law firm entered into with a city regarding a sewer fee dispute, which ultimately led to the firm collecting nearly 10 times more than the city anticipated, was valid and reasonable, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed today.
Court clarifies continuing objection procedure
If a trial court grants a continuing objection, counsel doesn't have to object each time the class of evidence is subsequently offered, but if the trial court doesn't specifically grant the right to a continuing objection, counsel must object to the evidence as it is offered in order to preserve the issue on appeal, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today.
Judges: Court should have questioned jurors
Judges on the Indiana Court of Appeals disagreed as to whether a man's murder conviction should be overturned because the trial court failed to investigate the impact of threats made against the jury. The majority determined the lack of action by the trial court resulted in a fundamental error that required reversing the conviction, but that he could be retried.
COA split on which statute of limitation applies
The Indiana Court of Appeals split today in its decision as to whether Indiana's two-year statute of limitations for personal injury torts or the three-year statute of limitations under the Federal Employers' Liability Act applied in a man's FELA claim in state court.
First impression in jury rule issue
The participation of alternate jurors in discussions of evidence during recesses from trial, as allowed under Indiana Jury Rule 20(a)(8), doesn't violate Indiana statute that prevents alternates from participating in deliberations. The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled on the matter for the first time today.
COA invites high court to revisit Indiana law
In a case involving the purchase of a home, Indiana Court of Appeals judges today disagreed as to whether the home sellers should be granted summary judgment in a fraud suit. The judges unanimously did agree to encourage the Indiana Supreme Court to re-evaluate a rule that protects a seller from a lawsuit, even if he lies about a property, as long as the prospective buyer had a reasonable opportunity to inspect the property.