• 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

Lakes v. Grange Mutual Casualty Co., No. 89A05-1009-CT-549, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2011)

March 4, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

Ind. Code § 27-7-5-4(b) requires a per person liability limit comparison to determine underinsurance, and the mandatory per person limit for underinsured coverage pursuant to Ind. Code § 27-7-5-2 is $50,000.

B&B, LLC v. Lake Erie Land Co., No. 45A04-1002-PL-183, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2011)

March 4, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

A landowner, who raises the subterranean water table on his land and creates a federally regulated wetland, may not invoke the common enemy doctrine of water diversion and shield himself from liability to adjoining landowners whose property also became federally regulated wetlands.

Cotton v. Cotton, No. 43A03-1005-DR-325 , ___ N.E.2d___, (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 24, 2011)

February 25, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Summons served on wife was insufficient as a matter of law for the court to exercise personal jurisdiction over defendant, because it neither complied with Trial Rule 4(C)(5) or due process. Due process requires that, at a minimum, a respondent in a dissolution proceeding be notified of the risk of default for failure to appear or otherwise respond.

In Re Guardianship of J.Y., No. 27A02-1005-GU-744, ___ N.E.2d ___, (Ind. Ct. App., Feb 15, 2011)

February 18, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

“[R]equirements of a personal representative are not the same as the requirements for a guardian, and as a result a nonprofit corporation not authorized as a corporate fiduciary in Indiana may serve as guardian where it could not serve as a personal representative.”

Thompson v. Gerowitz, No. 49A05-1005-CT-296, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 16, 2011)

February 18, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Barnes

Juror’s silence during voir dire when taken with her subsequent statement to the trial court regarding possible bias required the trial court to conduct a hearing out of the presence of the remainder of the jury to determine whether the juror’s silence indicated bias or lack of disinterest, and whether the hearing itself created a bias in the juror.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 216
  • Go to page 217
  • Go to page 218
  • Go to page 219
  • Go to page 220
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 260
  • 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