• 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

Henry v. Community Healthcare System Community Hospital, No. 19A-CT-1256, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 8, 2019).

October 14, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

Medical providers owe a common law duty of confidentiality to their patients, so a breach of that duty is possible.

Zelman v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., No. 19A-CC-989, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 8, 2019).

October 14, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

Affidavit of Debt did not lay a proper foundation to authenticate the Customer Agreement or credit card statements as business records admissible under Evidence Rule 803(6)’s hearsay exception; bank failed to designate admissible evidence establishing that defendant had opened a credit card account with the bank and that defendant owed the bank the amount alleged in the compliant.

Int’l Bus. Machines Corp. v. State, No. 49D01-1005-PL-21451, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 11, 2019).

October 14, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, S. David, Supreme

Post-judgment interest due to the State runs from the judgment on remand; the date of the original judgment was not final.

C.S. v. State, No. 19S-JV-137, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 1, 2019).

October 7, 2019 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: C. Goff, S. David, Supreme

Ind. Admin. Rule 14(B) permits remote participation in juvenile disposition-modification hearings where the parties have agreed or where the court issues a good cause order based on the factors listed in the rule including the child’s best interest.

Clark v. Mattar, No. 19A-CT-380, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2019).

October 7, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Trial court abused its discretion in denying for-cause challenge to juror who indicated that he would be unable to sit on a jury asked to determine damages for non-economic loss, which plaintiff was seeking.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 142
  • Go to page 143
  • Go to page 144
  • Go to page 145
  • Go to page 146
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 586
  • 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