FSSA had a right to intervene in guardianship because the spousal support order diverted money that would have otherwise been used to pay medical bills. The trial court could not increase spousal support because the state Medicaid statute requires a “fair hearing before the State agency” to determine if an allowance should be increased.
Walker v. State, No. 24A-CR-443, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 19, 2024).
Businesses have a legitimate interest in maintaining a safe environment and preserving order on their premises. However, once a business has entered into an agreement with an individual which grants the individual a contractual interest in its property, the individual may not be found to have committed criminal trespass so long as the individual’s contractual interest remains.
In re Guardianship of Sebastian, No. 23A-GU-3059, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 10, 2024).
When a parent, having abandoned a child, dies in that state of abandonment, the child’s inability to reunify with that parent is still due to abandonment for purposes of the Special Immigrant Juvenile statute
Dolsen v. VeoRide, Inc., No. 24S-PL-75, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 2, 2024).
To determine premises-liability for first-responding firefighters, first the Court should determine whether the plaintiff seeks to recover for the negligence that caused the emergency. If so, the first-responder’s rule bars the plaintiff’s claim. If not, then the Court should treat the firefighter as a licensee.
Abbott v. Wegert, No. 23A-EV-3004, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 3, 2024).
Small claims court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction to evict someone buying a house on contract; the property was worth more than $10,000 and the dispute was to ownership of the house.