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?
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.
A narrow U.S. Supreme Court majority signaled it may force Texas to broaden its death-penalty exemption for people who are intellectually disabled.
The Indiana Tax Court will hear arguments Wednesday on the campus of Notre Dame Law School.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals will again consider whether the protections offered by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act extend to sexual orientation.
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.
The Indiana Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday on whether introducing an injured man's immigration status to a jury in his lawsuit for future wages would be prejudicial enough to outweigh its probative value.
An attorney for Gov. Mike Pence argued Monday that Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act should not apply to a governor’s emails, prompting the plaintiff seeking those records to call the position chilling and reminiscent of the administration of President Richard Nixon.
Attorneys for an Indianapolis man have argued before a state appellate court that Indiana's religious freedom law protects him from paying taxes.
A southern Indiana church van driver who suspected children to be in need of services due to dangerous living conditions in his small community followed the law requiring him to report his suspicions. He didn’t want to provide his name, but he did so after a Department of Child Services hotline worker assured him his identity would remain confidential, as the law also requires.
A state attorney argued before the Indiana Supreme Court Thursday that the Department of Child Services cannot be sued by a man who reported suspected child abuse but whose promise of confidentiality was violated when his identity was disclosed to those he reported.
Five years after severe weather brought the stage of the Indiana State Fair grandstand to the ground, killing seven people and injuring dozens of others, the final defendant in the ensuing litigation is asking that summary judgment in its favor be upheld.
The justices of the Indiana Supreme Court will travel to Ball State University next week to hear oral arguments in a case involving a karate injury.
At the center of an Indiana Supreme Court oral argument Thursday was the question of when exigent circumstances and an officer’s community caretaker role trump a citizen’s right to protection from unlawful searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court seemed unlikely on Wednesday to place new limits on the ability of prosecutors to crack down on insider trading on Wall Street.
Nearly four years after he orchestrated an Indianapolis home explosion that killed two people, Mark Leonard is arguing that he should not have to spend the rest of his life in prison because his Sixth Amendment rights were violated.
Defense counsel for Mark Leonard, the man convicted of killing two people in a 2012 home explosion, argued before the Indiana Supreme Court Thursday that Leonard’s constitutional rights to an attorney were violated when an undercover officer posed as a hitman in prison and questioned Leonard, without his attorney present, about his plan to have a key witness killed.