Trial court did not abuse its discretion in modifying and reducing spousal maintenance obligation based on changes in the parties’ respective finances, even when there was no improvement in the medical condition of the party receiving maintenance.
Civil
Allen v. Clarian Health Partners, Inc., 49S02-1203-CT-140, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Dec. 19, 2012).
A contract doesn’t need to state a specific dollar amount for goods or services in order to be enforceable.
Wisner v. Laney, No. 71S03-1201-CT-7,___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Dec. 12, 2012).
For purposes of the Tort Prejudgment Interest Statute, a written settlement offer must be made within one year following the filing of a claim to be eligible for prejudgment interest, and the settlement offer can be made prior to the filing of a lawsuit.
Kosarko v. Padula, No. 45S03-1206-CT-310, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Dec. 12, 2012).
“[T]he Tort Prejudgment Interest Statute abrogates and supplants the common law prejudgment interest rules in cases covered by the statute.”
Inman v. State Farm Auto. Mut. Ins. Co., No. 41S01-1108-CT-515, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Dec. 12, 2012).
The Tort Prejudgment Interest Statute applies to an action by an insured against an insurer to recover benefits under the insured’s underinsured motorist (“UIM”) policy, and prejudgment interest can be awarded in excess of the policy limits set forth in an insured’s UIM policy.