Trial court did not err in denying appellate counsel for mother in TPR proceedings; even if mother had requested appellate counsel, she failed to make any effort for the purpose of an appeal and was unlikely to prevail on the merits.
Civil
Bishop v. Housing Auth. of South Bend, No. 71A03-0906-CV-273, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 1, 2010)
Tenant had right to jury trial on the ultimate outcome of ejectment proceedings, but not on the prejudgment immediate possession hearing.
State ex rel. Crain Heating Air Cond. & Refrig., Inc. v. Clark Circuit Court, No. 10S00-0910-OR-500, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Feb. 17, 2010)
If a ruling involves the granting, modifying, or dissolving of a temporary or preliminary injunction and has not been entered within ten days after the hearing thereon, there has been a delay in ruling and an interested party may immediately praecipe for withdrawal under the procedure provided in Trial Rule 53.1(E); it is not necessary for a party to await the thirty-day period described in Trial Rule 53.1(A) before filing a praecipe for withdrawal.
Bules v. Marshall County, No. 50S03-1001-CV-57, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Jan. 27, 2010)
The Indiana Tort Claims Act’s immunity for losses caused by temporary weather conditions during the period of reasonable response to a weather condition lasts at least until the weather condition has stabilized.
Johnson v. Johnson, No. 46S04-0907-CV-00346, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Jan. 28, 2010)
Dissolution agreement for husband to pay wife for her interest in the family farm, although silent on the subject, must have contemplated the regular annual renewal of the farm’s debt to finance its operations, but not the higher level of debt necessary to finance husband’s obligations to wife; trial court erred in modifying wife’s lien to allow husband to finance his divorce obligations.