Protective order petitioner has a burden of showing that “domestic or family violence has occurred” and that respondent “represents a credible threat to the safety” of the petitioner or petitioner’s child. Trial courts need only determine whether the petitioner has made the requisite showings by a preponderance of the evidence.
Civil
Gierek v. Anonymous 1, No. 22A-CT-1225, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 14, 2023).
The trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to grant plaintiffs’ motions to certify a class as a preliminary determination under the Medical Malpractice Act.
Randall v. Woodson, No. 22A-PL-2830, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 19, 2023).
Social Security Administration has exclusive authority over the issues of benefit misuse by representative payees and over the recovery of those misused funds; a trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
Ind. Dept. of Ins. v. Doe, No. 22A-CT-1276, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 2, 2023).
An underlying act of medical malpractice is a necessary predicate and condition precedent to a medical credentialing malpractice claim.
Where the Patient’s Compensation Fund is not a party to a settlement agreement between the claimant and the provider and the court must consider the liability of the health care provider as “admitted and established,” the Fund is not precluded from making an independent determination and may dispute whether the underlying conduct is compensable under the Act. The Fund does not have an affirmative duty to intervene in settlement negotiations between a claimant and a provider or to address a claim for excess damages until the claim has been filed in court.
Plummer v. Beard, No. 22A-CT-2559, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 4, 2023).
Community Health Network, Inc. v. McKenzie, 185 N.E.3d 368 (Ind. 2022), in which the Court held, in relevant part, that the public disclosure of private facts is a viable tort claim, applies retroactively.