• 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

In re the Guardianship of R.M.M., No. 09A02-0808-CV-725, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 23, 2009)

February 27, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Barnes

Trial court erred in denying incarcerated father’s petition to modify child support; Lambert requires that the child support obligation be based on his current actual earnings and assets.

Smith v. Champion Trucking Co., No. 93A02-0808-EX-701, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 25, 2009)

February 27, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

Third party settlement did not bar worker’s compensation benefits where the settlement was obtained before a worker’s compensation award had been resolved, and was in an amount less than the anticipated worker’s compensation benefit.

Knoebel v. Clark County Superior Court No. 1, No. 22A01-0808-CV-384, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 17, 2009)

February 20, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Probation officer demoted from chief probation officer status was not entitled to retain the salary increase for a chief probation officer.

Indianapolis Marion County Public Library v. Charlier Clark & Linnard P.C., No. 06A05-0804-CV-239, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 6, 2009)

February 13, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, J. Baker

Because plaintiff’s claims were for economic losses that arose from plaintiff’s complaint that it did not receive the benefit of its bargain, the damages claimed were not recoverable in tort and were best relegated to contract law.

Smyth v. Hester, No. 29A02-0803-CV-237, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 12, 2009)

February 13, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Darden

Trial court’s order for attorney fees was remanded for further consideration and explanation, because it did not provide any insight as to the reason for the award of attorney fees, i.e., what the trial court found to be frivolous, unreasonable, and bad faith conduct.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 251
  • Go to page 252
  • Go to page 253
  • Go to page 254
  • Go to page 255
  • 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