• 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

Goston v. State, No. 23S-CT-5, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 9, 2023).

January 9, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Per Curiam, Supreme

Trial court acted within its discretion to consider defendants’ motion for summary judgment after the deadline set in the case management order. The local rule on case management orders should be read in harmony with the Trial Rules.

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.

  • « 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 © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs