Shielding post-secondary educational institutions from pandemic‐related class action claims is within the General Assembly’s legislative authority, not an unconstitutional taking, and does not unconstitutionally impair the school’s contract obligations to its students.
Russell v. Russell, No. 23A-DC-578, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 22, 2023).
“Joint physical custody” means equal parenting time; while that might not require a perfectly equal 50% – 50% split of parenting time, granting Father 55.5% of parenting time and Mother 44.5% of parenting time is inconsistent with “joint physical custody.”
Baker v. State, No. 23A-CR-1340, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 27, 2023).
In a criminal jury trial where the State presents evidence of a greater number of separate criminal offenses than charged and does not designate the specific act or acts on which it relies for conviction, a general unanimity instruction is insufficient. The jury should be instructed that they must either unanimously agree that the defendant committed the same act or acts or that the defendant committed all the acts alleged. However, where multiple similar acts are part of one continuous episode, a special unanimity instruction is not required.
Marion Superior Court Probation Dept. v. Trapuzzano, No. 23A-CT-61, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 14, 2023).
The probation department has quasi-judicial immunity from liability.
Tom James Company, et al. v. Zurich American Insurance Company, No. 23A-PL-106, _ N.E.3d. _ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 1, 2023).
Insurance company did not waive its personal jurisdiction defense in the answer it filed after removal to federal court and before remand to state court.