“Where Trial Rule 15(C) addresses the relation back of amendments ‘changing the party against whom a claim is asserted,’ it requires that the party to be brought in by amendment ‘knew or should have known that but for a mistake concerning the identity of the proper party, the action would have been brought against him.’ T.R. 15(C) (emphasis added). In contrast, Trial Rule 17(C) applies where ‘the name or existence of a person is unknown.’ T.R. 17(F).”
Celebration Worship Center, Inc. v. Tucker, No. 22S01-1506-PL-401, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 29, 2015).
Homeowners met criteria for adverse possession of disputed property.
McFadden v. United States, No. 14-378, ___ U.S. ___ (June 18, 2015).
Under federal Controlled Substances Act, conviction for dealing a chemical analogue of a controlled substance requires proof that defendant knew he was dealing a regulated substance.
Jerden v. State, No. 07A05-1410-CR-498, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 19, 2015).
Trial court erred in reporting four driving-offense guilty verdicts to the BMV when it had entered convictions on only two counts and merged the other two on double-jeopardy grounds.
K.K. v. State, No. 49A02-1410-JV-687, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 22, 2015).
Smell of burnt marijuana emanating from a car gave probable cause to arrest all its occupants; subsequent search of one of the occupants was therefore lawful as incident to arrest.