• 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 Guardianship of Weber v. Weber, No. 21A-GU-2680, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2022).

January 3, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

After trial court granted spouse’s spousal support for Medicaid purposes, trial court properly allowed Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (FSSA) to intervene; FSSA was entitled to relief from judgment because the facts did not support spousal maintenance.

Morgan v. Dickelman Ins. Agency, Inc., No. 22A-PL-892, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 30, 2022).

January 3, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Summary judgment was appropriate for plaintiffs’ claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, negligence, and fraud against their insurance agency because plaintiffs did not review their easy-to-read, unambiguous insurance renewal certificates.

N.H. v. State, No. 22A-XP-1026, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 13, 2022).

December 19, 2022 Filed Under: Civil, Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

The trial court erred by striking some of the language included in the expungement statute (Ind. Code s 35-38-9-10(c)) from its order granting expungement; the language should either by left in its entirety or left out in its entirety.

In re Civil Commitment of B.N., No. 22S-MH-408, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 16, 2022).

December 19, 2022 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

When a party objects to a hearing being held remotely, good cause for proceeding remotely over the objection requires particularized and specific factual support. Mere mention of “the COVID-19 pandemic” was insufficient.

In re K.G., No. 22A-MI-502, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 6, 2022).

December 12, 2022 Filed Under: Civil, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Trial court did not have the statutory authority to grant request to amend child’s birth certificate to change child’s gender marker.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 35
  • Go to page 36
  • Go to page 37
  • Go to page 38
  • Go to page 39
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 260
  • 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