• 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

Horejs v. Milford, No. 19S-CT-97, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 21, 2019).

February 25, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

Husband’s claim for survivor damages did not abate upon his death and was not dependent on the existence of an heir.

Nicholson v. Lee, No.18A-CR-1371, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 14, 2019).

February 18, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

Gun owner was shielded from liability for failing to safely store and keep gun when the gun is procured by a crime and then later used to commit another crime.

In re Ma.H, No. 18A-JT-1296, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 18, 2019).

February 18, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. May, M. Robb

The requirement that Father admit molesting child to complete sex offender treatment violates Father’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination; the trial court’s reliance on his refusal to so admit as proof that his parental rights should be terminated violates his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process.

Linares v. El Tacarajo, No. 18A-CT-276, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 8, 2019).

February 11, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch, M. Robb

Using the Goodwin foreseeability analysis, an automobile salvage business did not have a duty to a patron of a mobile food truck serving food in its parking lot that exploded and caused injury to the patron.

In re D.H, No. 18A-JT-1861, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 1, 2019).

February 4, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

The trial court’s termination of parental rights order must be reversed due to the State’s failure to give Mother the due process imparted to her by Ind. Code 31-35-2-4.5(d) (the right to have DCS move to dismiss a termination petition when it has not provided her with services that were substantial and material in relation to the reunification plan).

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 85
  • Go to page 86
  • Go to page 87
  • Go to page 88
  • Go to page 89
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 254
  • 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