Although the court did not have personal jurisdiction over husband, it could dissolve the marriage and change the parties’ status from married to unmarried; it could not, however, adjudicate the incidences of marriage. Trial court also erred by not complying with the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act in the child custody proceedings.
Civil
In re Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of I.B., No. 03A05-0912-JV-676, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 17, 2010)
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.
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.