Because plaintiff sustained a direct injury, plaintiff had standing to sue in her own name when she had a bankruptcy pending.
Kansal v. Krieter, 22A-CT-2646, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 10, 2023).
Sexual misconduct claims against healthcare providers are not subject to the Medical Malpractice Act, but in a case where the doctor and the patient agree as to the touching that occurred but disagree as to the purpose of the touching, application of the Medical Malpractice Act and presentation to a medical-review panel might be appropriate.
State v. Lyons, No. 23S-CR-163, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 27, 2023).
Before excluding evidence as a Trial Rule 37 discovery sanction, a trial court must find that the exclusion is the sole remedy available to avoid substantial prejudice, or that the sanctioned party’s culpability reflects an egregious discovery violation.
Performance Service, Inc. v. Randolph Eastern School Corp., No. 23S-CP-59, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 28, 2023).
School corporation’s contract was void because the school corporation exceeded its authority by investing money in a project to earn a financial return.
Harris v. State, No. 23S-CR-165, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 29, 2023).
The jury in a habitual offender proceeding must be allowed to make the ultimate legal determination of whether the defendant has the status of habitual offender. Only evidence of the defendant’s alleged convictions is relevant to that determination. A defendant has no constitutional right to present irrelevant evidence.