• Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • Categories
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Juvenile
  • Courts
    • Supreme
    • Appeals
    • Tax
    • SCOTUS
    • 7th Circuit
  • Judges

Case Clips

Published by the Indiana Office of Court Services

Civil

Inman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., No. 41A01-1005-CT-225, ____ N.E.2d ____ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 30, 2010)

January 7, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

An insurer can be required to pay prejudgment interest in excess of uninsured and/or underinsured motorist limits in an action brought by an insured for failure to pay uninsured and/or underinsured motorist coverage.

In re the Paternity of R.M., No. 45A04-1001-JP-14, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 30, 2010)

January 7, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown

The defense of laches can apply in paternity actions.

In the Matter of the Paternity of: P.R., No. 36A01-1005-JP-255, ____ N.E.2d ______ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 29, 2010)

January 7, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Trial court properly took judicial notice of record in another proceeding, pursuant to Evidence Rule 201 as amended effective Jan. 2010, and permissibly did so post-hearing; the parties had the right to be heard on the notice but failed to demand it, thereby waiving the opportunity, although the better practice would have been for the trial court to have given the parties notice and an opportunity to be heard before taking the judicial notice and issuing its order.

In re M.F., No. 21A04-1002-JP-84, ___ N.E.2d ____ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 27, 2010)

December 28, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander, T. Crone

Sperm Donor Agreements may be valid if they meet criteria beyond the traditional elements of a contract; a physician must be involved in the insemination and the written instrument memorializing the arrangement must be sufficiently thorough and formalized. When parties enter into a facially valid donor agreement contract, the party seeking to avoid the contract has the burden of proof on matters of avoidance.

Commitment of G, No. 33A01-1006-MH-325, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 13, 2010)

December 17, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Sullivan

Evidence did not support commitment on the basis ordered but, as it was sufficient for commitment on an alternative basis, case is remanded for a review proceeding).

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 212
  • Go to page 213
  • Go to page 214
  • Go to page 215
  • Go to page 216
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 254
  • Go to Next Page »

Footer

About

Case Clips is a weekly publication of the Indiana Office of Court Services featuring appellate opinions curated by IOCS staff for Indiana judges.

Subscribe
  • Flickr
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Archive

Copyright © 2025 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs