Adopts an objective standard for determining when a statement made by an attorney about a judicial officer violates Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.2(a), “A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge . . . .”
Palmer v. Sales, No. 45A03-1302-SC-3, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2013).
T.R. 76(C)(5) does not apply to change of judge requests in small claims cases; the change of judge request made pursuant to T.R. 76(C)(1) should have been granted.
Asher v. Coomler , No. 49A04-1302-DR-71, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2013).
When the appointed special judge was unavailable, under T.R. 79(I)(2)(a), only a judge pro tempore, temporary judge, or a senior judge appointed by the special judge could preside over proceedings.
Atkins v. Veolia Water Indianapolis, LLC, No. 49A02-1302-CT-181, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 1, 2013).
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the party’s request to file a belated appeal. Although counsel did not have actual knowledge of the order, counsel did have notice, which is a prerequisite to relief under T.R. 72(E).
Barker v. State, No. 73A01-1212-CR-575, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 17, 2013).
“Whether home detention is imposed via a direct placement in a community corrections program or as a condition of probation, its accompanying statutory requirement that the detainee receive credit time militates toward counting it as part of the executed portion of his sentence.”