“If multiple hearings are unavoidable, then the trial court should, if at all possible, refrain from adjudicating the child a CHINS until evidence has been heard from both parents. And if an adjudication is unavoidable before evidence has been heard from the second parent, then the trial court must give meaningful consideration to the evidence provided by the second parent in determining whether the child remains a CHINS.”
Civil
Hunckler v. Air Sorce-1, Inc., No. 84A01-1405-CT-217, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 3, 2015).
“We will continue to rely on traditional tort and agency principles and, to the extent it was ever applied, abandon the volunteer doctrine.”
R.B. v. K.S., No. 48A05-1406-DR-275, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 3, 2015).
Trial court properly ordered the custodial parent to pay the non-custodial parent nearly $900 a week in child support.
J.K. v. T.C., No. 64A05-1406-PO-259, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 23, 2015).
Protective orders can’t be reissued, renewed, or extended “ad infinitum based solely upon evidence related to the protective order’s initial issuance,” the petitioner “bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a new protective order or extension of an existing order is required.”
Young v. Hood’s Gardens, Inc., No. No. 29S02-1405-PL-314, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 22, 2015).
“[T]he “value” attributable to the performance of work that triggers secondary liability under Indiana Code section 22-3-2-14(b) [Worker’s Compensation Act] includes both direct monetary payment as well as any ancillary consideration received for the work.”