Defendant property management company had no duty of care to plaintiff who was involved in a crash with a driver while both were intoxicated after leaving a bar managed by the company.
Civil
Doe #1 v. Ind. Dept. of Child Svcs., No. 49A02-1506-CT-682, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 26, 2016).
Under common law, DCS had a duty to protect the identity of a caller who reported children as being in need of service.
Jones v. State, No. 49A02-1508-CR-1148, __N.E.3D__ (Ind. Ct. App., May 17, 2016).
Warrantless search of residence is justified based on the exigent circumstances to conduct a welfare check on three minor children left unattended in the home in the middle of the night.
Costello v. Zavodnik, No. 49A04-1504-PL-163, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., May 23, 2016).
The trial court should have withdrawn admissions under T.R. 36(B) because of litigant’s abuse of T.R. 36.
Belork v. Latimer, No. 75A04-1503-MI-100, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 5, 2016).
“[A]djoining parcel owners can treat a fence not initially constructed on the true property line between their parcels as a partition fence, and in that circumstance the fence will be considered a partition fence for purposes of the maintenance and repair requirements and cost-sharing provisions of the partition fence statute.”