Admonishes DCS for its failure to afford litigants their due process rights and reminds the trial courts of their duty to ensure that litigants’ due process rights are not violated.
Civil
Morrison v. Vasquez, No. 18A-CT-376, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 28, 2018).
Ind. Code § 23-0.5-4-12’s provision that the address of a registered agent does not determine venue is not ineffective under T.R. 75(D).
Johnson v. Blue Chip Casino, LLC, No. 18A-SC-788, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 29 2018).
Plaintiff failed to prove that the presence of bed bugs in his hotel room more probably resulted from hotel’s negligence as opposed to another cause; plaintiff’s argument that res loquitur applied failed.
Tunstall v. Manning, No. 49A04-1711-CT-2572, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 20, 2018).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow Defendant to cross-examine Plaintiff’s expert witness about his disciplinary history with the Medical Licensing Board.
In re Z.B. v. Ind. Dept. Child Svcs., No. 18A-JT-318, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 31, 2018).
A CASA has the statutory authority to independently prosecute a petition to terminate parental rights when DCS opposes termination.