Trial court improperly granted T.R. 12(B)(1) motion for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because a fact-sensitive and claim-specific analysis is required to determine whether the First Amendment bars the claims against the church, the issue was not ripe for disposition.
Civil
Wheeler v. State, No. 21A-MI-1175, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 17, 2021).
Inmate was not required to plead exhaustion of remedies to state a claim for negligence; his negligence claim was not subject to dismissal under the Screening Statute on that basis.
Aberdeen Apartments II, LLC v. Miller, No. 21A-CT-1263, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 15, 2021).
Counsel did not commit misconduct for making a specific request for damages during rebuttal closing argument.
Duncan v. Barton’s Discounts, LLC, No. 21A-PL-211, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 3, 2021).
Possibly incriminating text messages are not protected by the Fifth Amendment in a civil discovery proceeding because the text messages were voluntarily created prior to the issuance of the discovery requests, and they are non-testimonial in nature.
Nail v. Smith, No. 21A-CT-563, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 1, 2021).
Trial court properly awarded attorney’s fees as a discovery sanction even though the party’s attorney was salaried in-house counsel.