In a CHINS case, the testimony of three physicians that child’s injuries were non-accidental and indicative of child abuse, plus establishing that time of his birth until his removal child was continuously in his parents’ care, established the elements of the Presumption Statute in order to shift the burden of production to the parents.
Civil
Dvorak v. State, No. 53A01-1604-CR-923, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 17, 2017).
In order to toll the statute of limitations in a criminal case, an individual must perform a “positive act” to conceal the fact that an offense has been committed.
Gonzalez v. State, No. 33A04-1612-MI-2807, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 19, 2017).
Forfeiture order was reversed when the trial court inferred from defendant’s presence in the vehicle that he was a co-conspirator with the other passengers for dealing in narcotics when there was no additional evidence of a nexus between defendant’s forfeited money and dealing in narcotics.
Sims v. Pappas, No. 45S03-1701-CT-26, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 11, 2017).
Prior alcohol-related driving convictions can be introduced into evidence for the issue of punitive damages and the remoteness of a prior offense does not affect the admissibility of the evidence.
Oaks v. Chamberlain, No. 92A04-1609-CC-2041, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 11, 2017).
In a medical malpractice case, expert’s testimony about his personal practices is relevant and admissible for the purpose of impeaching his testimony about the standard of care.