Opinions

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Erie Insurance Exchange v. Christine Cosme and Roy Cosme
No. 25A-CT-1439

Appeal from the Lake Superior Court, Judge Bruce D. Parent. The trial court found Erie Insurance Exchange liable for bad faith in failing to pay the Cosmes’ insurance claim following a rear-end collision. Despite a jury awarding the Cosmes over $8 million for damages related to the wreck and policy breaches, the trial court reduced the amount to approximately $3.6 million, citing the policy limitations as justification. The court upheld the denial of Erie’s motion for partial summary judgment, ruling that the Cosmes had sufficiently shown issues of material fact concerning Erie’s actions, and it allowed expert testimony categorizing Erie’s conduct as “opportunistic fraud.” Ultimately, the appellate court affirmed in part, reversed the reduction of breach of policy damages, and remanded for further consideration of total damages. Judge Felix authored the opinion, with Judges May and Mathias concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: Dina M. Cox, Charles R. Whybrew, Lewis Wagner & Trimble, Indianapolis, Indiana; and James P. Strenski, Tyler L. Jones, Drewry Simmons Vornehm LLP, Carmel, Indiana. Appellees’ attorneys: Angela M. Jones, Pillar Jones LLC, Crown Point, Indiana; Steven J. Sersic, Smith Sersic LLC, Munster, Indiana.

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

Court of Appeals of Indiana
North River Insurance Company and RiverStone Claims Management LLC v. Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc.
No. 25A-PL-375

Appeal from the Tippecanoe Superior Court, Judge Randy J. Williams. Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc. sued North River Insurance Company and RiverStone Claims Management LLC for insurance coverage related to pollution remediation costs at a former manufacturing site. The trial court initially granted partial summary judgment in favor of Landis, awarding over $10 million. On appeal, the court reversed this decision, ruling that the North River policies did not apply under New York law due to the pro rata allocation approach, which would yield no liability for North River, as the damages did not exceed the policy’s attachment point. The court remanded the case for the entry of summary judgment for the defendants on all claims. Judge Vaidik authored the opinion, with Judges Mathias and Pyle concurring. Appellants’ attorneys: Erik Mroz, Elizabeth S. Straw, Drewry Simmons Vornehm LLP, Carmel, Indiana; Bryan H. Babb, Bradley M. Dick, Bose McKinney & Evans LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana; John D. LaBarbera, Bevin Carroll, Kennedys Law LLP, Chicago, Illinois. Appellee’s attorney: Brent W. Huber, Jenny R. Buchheit, Robert A. Jorczak, Ice Miller LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana.

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

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Joel Thomas Meyer v. State of Indiana
No. 24A-CR-3025

Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court, Judge Angela Warner Sims. Meyer was found guilty of Level 1 felony attempted murder and Level 3 felony criminal confinement after severely attacking his fiancée. He appealed, claiming the officers’ warrantless entry into his home was unconstitutional and that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. The court affirmed his convictions, ruling that the officers acted reasonably under exigent circumstances due to visible blood and a history of domestic violence. The case was remanded for a correction in the judgment regarding the merger of the aggravated battery conviction into the attempted murder conviction. Judge Scheele authored the opinion, with Judge May concurring and Chief Judge Tavitas concurring in part. Appellant’s attorneys: Jennifer Jones Auger, Law Office of Jennifer Auger, Franklin, Indiana; Andrew J. Baldwin and Kinsey H. Chaney, Baldwin, Perry & Wiley PC, Franklin, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: 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
In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of C.J.B. (Minor Child); A.B. (Father), Appellant-Respondent v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner
No. 25A-JT-3154

Appeal from the Dearborn Circuit Court, Judge F. Aaron Negangard. A.B. (“Father”) appeals the termination of his parental rights to C.J.B. (“Child”), arguing that the trial court erred by denying his motion for a continuance of the fact-finding hearing while he was incarcerated. The court concludes that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion and that the denial did not violate Father’s due process rights. Father failed to demonstrate good cause for the continuance, did not follow the procedural requirements, and his lack of communication further indicated a lack of interest in the proceedings. Chief Judge Tavitas authored the opinion. Judges Bailey and Foley concur. Appellant’s attorney: R. Patrick Magrath, West Sixth Law LLP, Madison, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: 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
Drew Sanders, Pure Holdings, Inc., and Pure Development Capital, Inc. v. Chris Seger
No. 25A-PL-1345

Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court, Judge Mark K. Dudley. The trial court dissolved the corporations Pure Holdings and Pure Development Capital, asserting an irreconcilable deadlock between the parties, but failed to find jurisdiction over Pure Development, which was not a named party in the dissolution proceedings. The appellate court reversed the dissolution of Pure Development, affirming the dissolutions of Pure Holdings and Pure Development Capital, citing a breakdown of trust and the inability of the parties to govern effectively as evidence of deadlock. Additionally, the court upheld the dismissal of Sanders’s counterclaims for breach of fiduciary duty and abuse of process. Judge Weissmann authored the opinion, with Judges Bradford and DeBoer concurring. Attorneys for appellants Pure Holdings Inc. and Pure Development Capital Inc.: B. (Too) Keller, Matthew R. Macaluso, Keller Macaluso LLC, Carmel, Indiana. Attorneys for appellant Drew Sanders: Andrew W. Hull, Michael R. Limrick, Christopher D. Wagner, Megan M. Riley, Hoover Hull Turner LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana. Attorneys for appellee: Robert D. MacGill, Matthew T. Ciulla, Patrick J. Sanders, Elizabeth L. Merritt, MacGill PC, Indianapolis, Indiana.

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

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Taylor Routh v. Bernard Kappe, Joseph K. Bernard, State of Indiana, Indiana Department of Transportation, Delaware County, Indiana, and City of Muncie, Indiana
No. 25A-PL-2593

Appeal from the Delaware Circuit Court, Judge John M. Feick. Taylor Routh initiated a lawsuit against multiple parties, including the State of Indiana and the Indiana Department of Transportation, after a motor vehicle collision. The State Parties moved for summary judgment, asserting immunity which the trial court granted. Routh appealed, arguing the court erred. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that INDOT’s decision to remove a traffic signal and its subsequent planning phase for remedial measures constituted discretionary functions shielded from liability. The court agreed with the trial court’s reliance on previous case law indicating governmental decision-making for traffic safety falls under immunity protections. Judge Bradford authored the opinion, with Judges Pyle and Kenworthy concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: Austin P. Sparks, Jason R. Delk, Delk McNally LLP, Muncie, Indiana. Appellees INDOT and State of Indiana’s attorney: 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
Aaron Renzy Gordy v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-2533

Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Magistrate Judge Peggy R. Hart. Aaron Gordy appeals his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred by merging his convictions instead of vacating them, which he claims violates his rights against double jeopardy. The court held that a double jeopardy violation did not occur, as there were no separate judgments of conviction for the merged counts. The court found that the trial court correctly entered judgment of conviction solely for the Level 3 felony aggravated battery after agreeing with both parties that the other counts would merge. Therefore, the court affirmed Gordy’s conviction. Senior Judge Baker authored the opinion, with Judges Mathias and Felix concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: Talisha R. Griffin, Peter M. Laramore, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: 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
James Easter, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
No. 25A-CR-1229

Appeal from Marion Superior Court, Judge James K. Snyder. James Easter was convicted of multiple crimes, including rape by force and rape by disregarding refusal, after assaulting his ex-girlfriend. He appealed the convictions on the grounds that they constituted substantive double jeopardy. The court found that both rape counts were based on the same act of oral sex, thus applying the framework from a recent Supreme Court decision, which concluded that his dual convictions for rape amounted to a single offense. Additionally, the court determined that his conviction for criminal confinement also violated the double jeopardy doctrine since the State could not demonstrate that the confinement was separate from the force used during the rape. Consequently, the convictions for rape by disregarding refusal and criminal confinement were vacated, and the case was remanded for correction. Judge Weissmann authored the opinion, with Judge Bradford and Judge DeBoer concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Ellen M. O’Connor, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: 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
George Lane v. Lloyd Arnold, DOC Commissioner, and Shane McHenry, Dearborn County Sheriff
No. 25A-PL-2925

Appeal from the Dearborn Superior Court, Judge Sally A. McLaughlin. George Lane, who was required to register as a sex offender for 10 years following his 2008 Indiana conviction, sought declaratory relief after moving to Kentucky where he was mandated to register for life. Upon returning to Indiana, officials informed him of a lifetime registration requirement due to his Kentucky status. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Indiana officials, affirming that Lane was required to register for life in Indiana based on his ongoing legal obligations under Kentucky law. The court reasoned that Lane’s registration requirements in Kentucky were sufficient to invoke Indiana’s Jurisdiction Statute, which necessitates compliance with the more stringent registration length. Judge Mathias authored the opinion, with Judges May and Felix concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Cara Schaefer Wieneke, Wieneke Law Office, LLC, Brooklyn, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: 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
Chasity M. Turpen, v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-3024

Appeal from the Lawrence Superior Court, Pro Tem Judge Robert R. Cline. Chasity M. Turpen appeals the trial court’s order of restitution, which the court reversed. Turpen contended that she did not plead guilty to the criminal mischief charge, thus there was no factual basis for a restitution order regarding that allegation. The court agreed with Turpen, concluding that the plea agreement did not constitute an agreement for restitution for actions related to the dismissed charge. Judge Brown authored the opinion, with Judges Altice and DeBoer concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Nicholas J. Moll, Lawrence County Public Defender Agency, Bedford, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: 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
Jeremiah Shanks v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-1539

Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge James K. Snyder. Jeremiah Shanks was convicted of murder, armed robbery, and unlawful possession of a firearm following the shooting death of Elijah Martin during a gun deal. He appealed, claiming his convictions for murder and armed robbery constitute double jeopardy. The court agreed, noting that the state failed to rebut the presumption of a double jeopardy violation because both offenses stemmed from a single continuous act — the shooting being the force element in the robbery charge. The court reversed the armed robbery conviction and remanded for its vacation. Judge Scheele authored the opinion, with Judge Felix concurring and Judge Brown dissenting. Brown writes that he would affirm both convictions, finding that murder and robbery are two distinct, chargeable crimes and therefore the continuous crime doctrine does not apply. Appellant’s attorneys: Talisha Griffin, Sarah Medlin, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: 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
Madison Futa and Sarah Denunzio v. Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Inc., Saint Joseph High School, John Kennedy, Debra Brown, and Justin Cochran
No. 25A-CT-2216

Appeal from the St. Joseph Circuit Court, Special Judge Michael A. Christofeno. The court affirms the trial court’s entry of summary judgment for the defendants, finding that the plaintiffs’ claims were time-barred by Indiana’s two-year statute of limitations. The court determined that the claims accrued when the plaintiffs graduated from high school, well before the filing of the complaint, and rejected arguments about tolling based on COVID-19, the discovery rule, continuing wrong, and fraudulent concealment. The plaintiffs had not demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact that would preclude summary judgment. Judge Mathias authored the opinion, with Judges May and Felix concurring. Appellants’ attorneys: Brandon E. Tate, Katherine A. Piscione, Waldron Tate Land LLC, Indianapolis, Indiana. Attorneys for appellees Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, St. Joseph High School, John Kennedy and Debra Brown: Lyle R. Hardman, Hunt Suedhoff Kearney, LLP, South Bend, Indiana; and Robert T. Keen Jr., Barrett McNagny LLP, Fort Wayne, Indiana. Attorneys for appellee Justin Cochran: Kenneth E. Biggins, Jr. and Jeremy J. McDonald, Lee and Zalas, P.C., South Bend, Indiana.

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.