• 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

Civil

M.M. v. L.P., No. 23A-PO-2089, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 5, 2024).

August 5, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas, L. Weissmann

The trial court was not required to transfer a pending protection order case to the special judge handling parties’ post-dissolution matters when the protection order did not relate to any pending post-dissolution proceedings and did not impact parenting time.

In re Guardianship of Adducci, No. 23A-GU-2433, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 17, 2024).

July 22, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

FSSA had a right to intervene in guardianship because the spousal support order diverted money that would have otherwise been used to pay medical bills. The trial court could not increase spousal support because the state Medicaid statute requires a “fair hearing before the State agency” to determine if an allowance should be increased.

Dolsen v. VeoRide, Inc., No. 24S-PL-75, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 2, 2024).

July 8, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, Supreme

To determine premises-liability for first-responding firefighters, first the Court should determine whether the plaintiff seeks to recover for the negligence that caused the emergency. If so, the first-responder’s rule bars the plaintiff’s claim. If not, then the Court should treat the firefighter as a licensee.

Abbott v. Wegert, No. 23A-EV-3004, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 3, 2024).

July 8, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

Small claims court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction to evict someone buying a house on contract; the property was worth more than $10,000 and the dispute was to ownership of the house.

NFI Interactive Logistics, LLC v. Bruski, No. 24S-CR-217, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 26, 2024).

July 1, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Foley

Trial court properly denied TR 12(B)(6) motion; the complaint encompasses viable claims premised on the failure to warn after potentially contributing to a hazard on the road, and the failure to comply with the statute requiring driver to turn on emergency flashers and place warning devices behind his vehicle.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Go to page 10
  • Go to page 11
  • Go to page 12
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 256
  • 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