• 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

Sanders v. US Bank Trust Nat’l Assoc., No. 24A-MF-1265, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 27, 2025).

September 2, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, R. Pyle

Ind. Code 32-30-10-14, regarding the distribution of sheriff sale proceeds, allows junior mortgagees to retain their rights to surplus proceeds when their liens are displaced by a senior foreclosure.

Nielson v. State, No. 24A-CR-2295, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 27, 2025).

September 2, 2025 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

The invited-error doctrine applies only when a party challenging a trial-court action affirmatively requested the action as part of a deliberate, well-informed trial strategy.

Ocampo v. State, No. 24A-CR-2785, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 2025).

September 2, 2025 Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Appeals, M. DeBoer

The legality of a K9’s interior sniff of a vehicle before probable cause has been established to conduct a search is governed by the “instinctive entry rule,” under which a K9’s instinctive entry into a vehicle does not implicate the Fourth Amendment so long as it is not directed, encouraged, or facilitated by officers.

In re P.F., No. 25A-JC-10, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 25, 2025).

August 26, 2025 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, M. DeBoer

Trial court erred in finding that reasonable efforts were not required to reunify child with parents; there was insufficient evidence that all the elements of the Multiple CHINS provision (Ind. Code 31-34-21-5.6(b)(7)) were proven. “Removed from the home of the child’s parent…under a dispositional decree” necessarily means that the child was placed outside the parent’s home for any period of time pursuant to a dispositional decree. A trial home visit at a parent’s house is not “removal.”

In re Paternity of G.S., No. 25A-AD-100, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 13, 2025).

August 18, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

Paternity proceeding was not required to be transferred to the county where adoption was pending.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 592
  • 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