• 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

Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Brown, No. 49A02-1001-CT-80, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 17, 2010)

September 28, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Adult wrongful death statute allows parents to recover damages for loss of adult child’s services.

Kalwitz v. Kalwitz, No. 46A03-0912-CV-574, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 20, 2010)

September 28, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

As all small claims defenses are deemed at issue without a responsive pleading, a litigant wanting an “automatic” small claims change of judge must request it within 30 days of the date the case is placed on the CCS as having been filed.

In the Matter of the Commitment of A.L., No. 49A02-1001-MH-76, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 23, 2010)

September 28, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, B. Barteau

Even though petition for emergency detention alleged only severe disability as a basis, trial court could properly rely in its decision on dangerousness as well.

Hatter v. Pierce Mfg., Inc., No. 49A02-0907-CV-659, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 7, 2010)

September 17, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Failure to use the last peremptory against either of the two jurors a party complained should have been dismissed for cause required the party to show the failure to dismiss both of the jurors was erroneous, when court had made the entire venire available for challenges for cause before requiring peremptories to be exercised.

Wolverine Mutual Insurance Co. v. Oliver, No. 20A03-1003-SC-162, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 9, 2010)

September 17, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

Given that Small Claims Rule 4(A) provides that the statute of limitations is “deemed at issue” and that the trial court asked if there was a limitations question at a point when plaintiff could still have litigated it, the court properly decided the case based on the statute of limitations even though defendant had not raised or argued it.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 222
  • Go to page 223
  • Go to page 224
  • Go to page 225
  • Go to page 226
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 256
  • 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