• 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

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).

Campbell v. Campbell, 18A-DR-361, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 31, 2019).

February 4, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: J. Baker, M. Robb

Trial court properly denied spousal maintenance because it determined that spouse that receives SSD benefits is not incapacitated to the extent that her ability to support herself is materially affected.

Crawfordsville Town & Country Home Center, Inc. v. Cordova, No. 18A-CT-314, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 24, 2019).

January 28, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

Equipment rental company had no duty to provide bilingual warnings for an aerial lift when warnings were given by the manufacturer and were clearly visible.

Fields v. Safway Group Holdings, LLC, No. 18A-CT-314, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 24, 2019).

January 28, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. May, P. Mathias

Trial court properly granted TR 60(B)(8) motion because equitable considerations can constitute the exceptional circumstances required to grant the motion.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 88
  • Go to page 89
  • Go to page 90
  • Go to page 91
  • Go to page 92
  • 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