Vacates the portion of the Court of Appeals decision that makes the broad statement that law-of-the-case doctrine “is applicable only when an appellate court determines a legal issue, not a trial court.”
Civil
H.H. v. S. H., No. 20A-PO-926, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 13, 2020).
Ind. Code § 34-26-5-9(f) does not require that the trial court make a particularized finding to support a deviation from the stated two-year term when issuing a protective order.
In re Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of K.R., No. 20S-JT-63, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 15, 2020).
Drug test records are exceptions to the hearsay rule under the records of a regularly conducted business activity (Ind. Rule Evid. 803(6)).
Brown v. Southside Animal Shelter, Inc., No. 20A-CT-66, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 13, 2020).
Animal shelter had a duty to inform prospective adopters of a dog’s vicious characteristics so far as they were known or ascertainable by exercise of reasonable care.
Glover v. Allstate Property & Casualty Ins. Co., No. 20S-CT-23, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 8, 2020).
Decedent was covered by insurance policy as a “resident relative” because she lived with her parents, and her parents did not need to notify insurance company of her status because she was not an “operator” living within their household. Additionally, the insurance policy’s anti-stacking provision did not limit an insured’s ability to recover under multiple UIM policies and that the policy’s offset provision reduces only the payments made on behalf of those persons directly liable for the injury.