Because plaintiff sustained a direct injury, plaintiff had standing to sue in her own name when she had a bankruptcy pending.
Civil
Kansal v. Krieter, 22A-CT-2646, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 10, 2023).
Sexual misconduct claims against healthcare providers are not subject to the Medical Malpractice Act, but in a case where the doctor and the patient agree as to the touching that occurred but disagree as to the purpose of the touching, application of the Medical Malpractice Act and presentation to a medical-review panel might be appropriate.
Performance Service, Inc. v. Randolph Eastern School Corp., No. 23S-CP-59, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 28, 2023).
School corporation’s contract was void because the school corporation exceeded its authority by investing money in a project to earn a financial return.
Miller v. Patel, No. 22S-CT-371, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 29, 2023).
Convictions entered after a guilty plea have the same preclusive effect in subsequent litigation as those entered after jury or court verdicts.
Med. Licensing Bd. of Ind. v. Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, No. 22S‐PL‐338, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 30, 2023).
Abortion providers have standing to contest the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1 (2022) because the statute criminalizes their work, and so they face the sort of imminent, direct, personal injury. Indiana Constitution’s Article 1, Section 1 protects a woman’s right to an abortion that is necessary to protect her life or to protect her from a serious health risk, but the General Assembly retains broad legislative discretion for determining whether and the extent to which to prohibit abortions. The Court reversed the trial court’s preliminary injunction.