• 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

Thomas v. Valpo Motors, Inc., No. 24S-PL-286, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 13, 2025).

May 19, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, Supreme

For purposes of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, in claims alleging breach of implied warranty, a buyer need only show to the satisfaction of the factfinder that the seller had “a reasonable opportunity to cure” its failure to comply with its warranty obligations. The buyer can meet this burden of proof by showing that he explicitly asked the seller to cure (i.e., repair, replace, or refund) or that he notified the seller of the purported defect and the seller proposed no remedy in response.

Qualls v. State, No. 24A-CR-131, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 15, 2025).

May 19, 2025 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Unless there is new evidence or information discovered to warrant additional charges, the potential for prosecutorial vindictiveness is too great for courts to allow the State to bring additional charges against a defendant who successfully moves for a mistrial, thus creating the presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness.

Kelly v. State, No. 25S-PC-108, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Apr. 30, 2025).

May 5, 2025 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: D. Molter, Supreme

While the Indiana Rules of Post-Conviction Remedies require appellate screening before filing a successive petition for post-conviction relief, those rules do not require appellate screening before amending a successive petition.

Lammons v. EDCO Environmental Serv., Inc., No. 24A-CT-2057, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 2, 2025).

May 5, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

When defendant asked the city to protect consumers from “unscrupulous licensed contractors,” her statement, as a matter of law, did not constitute a false defamatory statement. Defendant neither stated nor implied a provably false fact but merely indicated her honestly held opinion.

Isrig v. Trustees of Ind. Univ., No. 24S-CT-158, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., Apr. 22, 2025).

April 28, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: D. Molter, M. Massa, Supreme

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur may be applied to premises liability cases involving fixtures where an invitee is injured on a landowner’s premises.

  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 586
  • 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 © 2025 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs