Biological parent whose rights have been terminated cannot circumvent the law by filing a custody action under Ind. Code 31-17-2-3.
Civil
Miller v. Town Bd. Of Sellersburg, No. 10A01-1612-MI-2908, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 29, 2017).
Town clerk-treasurer could not mandate additional deputies; Ind. Code § 36-5-6-7 states that the town legislative body must approve the appointment of deputies.
In re Unsupervised Estate of Owsley, No. 49A02-1701-EU-207, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 21, 2017).
Because the victims of the civil rights action are the decedent’s survivors, not the decedent himself, no estate needed to be open for the sole purpose of pursuing a federal civil rights action.
Buskirk v. Buskirk, No. 06A01-1610-DR-2296, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 15, 2017).
Contract between husband and wife, on keeping their property and income separate, entered into after marriage disagreement, was an enforceable reconciliation agreement made with valid consideration.
In re Adoption of J.R.O., No. 82A05-1706-AD-1331, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 16, 2017).
Ind. Code 31-19-9-18 does not require the filing of a written motion to contest an adoption; counsel’s oral objection was sufficient.