While the “top stories” of each year are usually easy to define, there are always other stories that, while perhaps not as high-profile, are equally as important to our readers.
Read More
The Indiana Supreme Court hosted the Fall 2020 Bar Admission Ceremony by videoconference Monday in keeping with safeguards of hosting once events online amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of the speakers encouraged new Indiana lawyers to look to the example of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Read More
A harshly split Indiana Supreme Court has ruled 3-2 in favor of a woman who was found in contempt for refusing to unlock her smart phone in a criminal investigation. A majority of the high court reversed the contempt order, holding in a landmark ruling that forcing her to unlock her iPhone would violate her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Read More
He describes himself as “a kid from a cornfield.” And for Justice Christopher Goff, ties to his cornfield community run deep.
Read More
The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Vectren energy, finding it followed state law when it changed its method of determining the credit its customers receive when producing excess solar and wind energy.
A dispute between a divorced husband and wife that became more inflamed when the arbitrator submitted, and the trial court adopted, an erroneous report caused a split in the Indiana Supreme Court over the decision not to grant transfer.
Indiana Supreme Court justices have split in denying transfer to a drug case, with the chief justice writing in dissent that the defendant’s maximum sentence should be reduced because he didn’t have access to problem-solving courts.
Wells County Prosecutor Andrew John Carnall has been publicly reprimanded after he improperly engaged with law enforcement during an incident involving his son this past summer.
A dispute involving a roof repair that led to a breach of contract claim and a counterclaim alleging a violation of the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act is headed for the Indiana Supreme Court after the justices granted transfer to the case.
Leaders from all three branches of Indiana government rallied last month to discuss ongoing statewide efforts to address the growing mental health needs of Hoosiers — and to promote a new way of working together.
A dispute between a Montgomery County couple, the town of Linden and multiple county departments over whether drainage improvements resulted in a permanent physical invasion of their land will go before the Indiana Supreme Court.
Students who sued Indiana University and Purdue University alleging breaches of contract when the schools moved to online learning can continue with their case after the Indiana Supreme Court denied the universities’ petition for transfer.
A Cass County man convicted of multiple felonies after police responded to a report of a possible robbery at his home has secured a reversal from the Indiana Supreme Court after convincing the justices his Pirtle rights were violated during a police search. However, one justice, while concurring, suggested the high court take another look at Pirtle in the future.
Indiana Supreme Court justices granted transfer to only one case among 28 others, agreeing to hear a dispute involving a traveling actor’s attempts to receive CARES Act benefits in Indiana.
Neither the juvenile court nor the criminal court has jurisdiction over a man who allegedly committed child molesting while still a minor but whom the state did not attempt to criminally charge until he was over 21, creating a “jurisdictional gap” in cases where an offender ages out of the juvenile system, according to the Indiana Supreme Court. But the court’s majority holding was challenged by two dissenting justices, who argued the Indiana Legislature “would never have intended” for the alleged criminal act to go unpunished.
The Indiana Supreme Court has swiped at a Court of Appeals of Indiana ruling that allowed a defendant accused of child sex crimes to take the deposition of his accuser, concluding that a disputed state statute preventing such depositions does not conflict with the Indiana Trial Rules.
Duke Energy will not get a second chance to convince the Indiana Supreme Court that it erred in ruling the utility cannot recoup its past costs for coal-ash cleanup efforts.
Huntington attorney Joseph Northrop, former chairman of Pike Lumber Co., Inc., has died.
The Indiana Supreme Court has determined a trial court didn’t err in its method of dividing up assets between a divorced Hendricks County couple, parting ways with the opinion of the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Indiana Supreme Court justices were divided on an issue of first impression brought by Duke Energy and the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, ultimately ruling that the utility cannot recover past coal-ash cleanup costs adjudicated under a prior rate order by treating the costs as a capitalized asset.
The Indiana Medical Malpractice Act does not apply to claims for indemnification filed by one medical provider against another, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled. The court’s decision means a breach-of-contract claim filed against a radiology services provider can proceed, because the MMA’s statute of limitations did not preclude the claim.
The Indiana Supreme Court has altered an October opinion reinstating a murder conviction against a defendant convicted as a teen of killing a toddler, granting rehearing to delete its prejudice analysis. The core holding of the opinion, however, remains unchanged.
Upholding the trial court’s refusal to reduce the bond or grant conditional release to a teenager connected to a home invasion, the Indiana Supreme Court has also chided the Court of Appeals of Indiana for reversing the trial court and issuing a ruling that required the teen to be released immediately.
A mother who brought claims for emotional distress after learning that her disabled daughter had been sexually abused can once again proceed with her case after a majority of the Indiana Supreme Court created a new rule eliminating the proximity requirement for emotional distress recovery. A dissenting justice, however, warned that the “watershed” ruling could have a wider-ranging impact than anticipated.