Trial court properly exercised its discretion to reconsider its initial appointment of the special administrator of an estate. Though not required by statute or trial rule, courts should nevertheless give notice and hold a hearing before appointing a special administrator or rescinding such an appointment.
O’Bryant v. Adams, No. 18S-PL-584, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 4, 2019).
A valid forum-selection clause, in which the parties agree by contract to litigate their disputes in a specific forum, does not deprive a trial court of personal jurisdiction over parties that would otherwise be subject to the court’s jurisdiction.
Town of Brownsburg, Ind. v. Fight Against Brownsburg Annexation, No. 19S-PL-342, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 5, 2019).
A trial court hearing a remonstrance proceeding on judicial review must consider the evidence submitted by both the municipality and the remonstrators, and need not defer to either the municipality’s own evidence supporting the annexation or its determination that it met the statutory requirements.
In re Paternity of Bonilla, No. 18A-JP-2488, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 5, 2019).
Trial court had the authority and duty to make requisite findings on special immigrant juvenile status in accordance with 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(27)(J).
Bedolla v. State, No. 19S-PC-328, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 28, 2019).
The post-conviction court abused its discretion in closing evidence without allowing counsel to make an offer of proof and to secure a deposition of a witness who could help prove the defendant had been wrongly convicted of murder.