• Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • Categories
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Juvenile
  • Courts
    • Supreme
    • Appeals
    • Tax
    • SCOTUS
    • 7th Circuit
  • Judges

Case Clips

Published by the Indiana Office of Court Services

Olbera, et al. v. Sykes, No. 25A-JP-2005, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 30, 2026).

March 30, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. DeBoer

Marital presumption as legal parent rebutted by biological father of child as biological father did not relinquish his rights to legal parentage.

Moyers v. State, No. 26S-CR-86, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Mar. 20, 2026).

March 23, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: D. Molter, G. Slaughter, L. Rush, Supreme

The Powell test applies to multiple convictions for elevated offenses that share a common base offense. Stated another way, a base offense and its elevated forms constitute a single statutory offense.

Rodriguez v. State, No. 25A-CR-1789, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 18, 2026).

March 23, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

Pursuant to Indiana Evidence Rule 103, a defendant preserves a continuing objection to the admission of evidence for appellate review simply by making a timely objection to that evidence during trial, identifying the specific ground for the objection, and receiving the trial court’s definitive ruling on the objection on the record at trial.

State v. Watson, No. 25A-CR-1789, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 18, 2026).

March 23, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Under Indiana law, prior accusations are demonstrably false where the victim has admitted the falsity of the charges or they have been disproved.

Indiana Compensation Rating Bureau and Indiana Department of Insurance v. Technology Insurance Company, No. 26S-PL-83, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Mar. 17, 2026).

March 23, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, L. Rush, Supreme

Whether the Company is entitled to relief rests on two questions: first, whether the Company had to follow the dispute-resolution provisions set out in the Assigned Risk Plan and agreements, limiting the Company’s relief in the trial court to judicial review under the Administrative Orders and Procedures Act; second, assuming the Company is limited to seeking recourse under AOPA, whether the Company properly sought judicial review.

  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 600
  • Go to Next Page »

Footer

About

Case Clips is a weekly publication of the Indiana Office of Court Services featuring appellate opinions curated by IOCS staff for Indiana judges.

Subscribe
  • Flickr
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Archive

Copyright © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs