“Indiana should hereby adopt the largely case-by-case approach, finding that a tenant’s liability to the landlord’s insurer for damage-causing negligence depends on the reasonable expectations of the parties to the lease as ascertained from the lease as a whole and any other admissible evidence.”
Civil
In re I.B., No. 82A05-1402-AD-65, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 28, 2014).
A prospective adoptive parent’s prior conviction was not dispositive (Ind. Code § 31-19-11-1) and the children were entitled to an individualized determination of their best interests.
Lyons v. Richmond Cmty. School Corp., No. 89S04-1312-PL-788, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 28, 2014).
Because whether a plaintiff has complied with the requirements of the ITCA is one of law, but the answer may depend upon the resolution of disputed facts, the issue should be handled by a carefully drafted jury instruction.
Dawson v. Thornton, Inc., No. 49A02-1403-CT-208, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 22, 2014).
The trial court properly did not instruct the jury regarding spoliation of evidence when plaintiff inspected and took pictures of the evidence, and the evidence was available for over a year after the incident.
Wysocki v. Johnson, No. 45S03-1407-CT-459, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 15, 2014).
Liability under the Crime Victims Relief Act is a ”matter of the factfinder’s discretionary judgment of whether the defendant is criminally culpable.”