The thirty-seven-month time period between the temporary custody order and the permanent custody order was an extraordinary delay that prejudiced mother and violated her due process rights. Trial courts have a statutory duty under Ind. Code § 31-17-2-6 to expedite custody proceedings.
Civil
M.M. v. L.P., No. 23A-PO-2089, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 5, 2024).
The trial court was not required to transfer a pending protection order case to the special judge handling parties’ post-dissolution matters when the protection order did not relate to any pending post-dissolution proceedings and did not impact parenting time.
In re Guardianship of Adducci, No. 23A-GU-2433, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 17, 2024).
FSSA had a right to intervene in guardianship because the spousal support order diverted money that would have otherwise been used to pay medical bills. The trial court could not increase spousal support because the state Medicaid statute requires a “fair hearing before the State agency” to determine if an allowance should be increased.
Dolsen v. VeoRide, Inc., No. 24S-PL-75, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 2, 2024).
To determine premises-liability for first-responding firefighters, first the Court should determine whether the plaintiff seeks to recover for the negligence that caused the emergency. If so, the first-responder’s rule bars the plaintiff’s claim. If not, then the Court should treat the firefighter as a licensee.
Abbott v. Wegert, No. 23A-EV-3004, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 3, 2024).
Small claims court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction to evict someone buying a house on contract; the property was worth more than $10,000 and the dispute was to ownership of the house.