• 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

Barrand v. Martin, No. 18A-JP-1796, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 1, 2019).

March 4, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

The Court of Appeals urges all trial courts to “carefully consider the possible impact of SSR benefits when determining whether to provide a credit to a non-custodial parent for his or her child support obligation.”

Perkins v. Fillio, No. 18A-PL-2278, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 19, 2019).

February 25, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

For a premises liability claim regarding a headbutting ram, trial court erred in granting summary judgment because it is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether rams are dangerous as a class of animals and, if so, a genuine issue as to whether Defendant took reasonable measures to prevent the ram from causing harm to invitees.

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.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 87
  • Go to page 88
  • Go to page 89
  • Go to page 90
  • Go to page 91
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 256
  • 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