• 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

Estrada v. State, No. 20A03-1110-CR-474, __ N.E.2d__ (Ind. Ct. App., June 22, 2012).

June 29, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, W. Garrard

As two of Estrada’s string of five robberies were armed, and she was 16 when she committed them, they were not within the subject matter jurisdiction of the juvenile court in which she was adjudicated delinquent for the other three robberies, so even assuming the successive prosecution statute applies to delinquencies the two armed robberies were not offenses which “should have been charged” in the juvenile proceeding.

Harmon v. State, No. 20A03-1110-CR-529, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 28, 2012).

June 29, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik, P. Mathias

Evidence was insufficient to prove the weight of the manufactured methamphetamine was three grams or more, as required for A felony manufacturing.

In Re: Prosecutor's Subpoena Regarding S.H. and S.C., 73A01-1109-CR-468, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 22, 2012).

June 28, 2012 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

A prosecutor investigating a crime before charging someone without a grand jury has the same authority to grant use immunity as a prosecutor using a grand jury.

Gill v. Evansville Sheet Metal Works, Inc., No. 49S05-1111-CV-672, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., June 25, 2012).

June 28, 2012 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: F. Sullivan, Supreme

Defined “improvement to real property” as used in Indiana Code 32-30-1-5 as “(1) an addition to or betterment of real property; (2) that is permanent; (3) that enhances the real property’s capital value; (4) that involves the expenditure of labor or money; (5) that is designed to make the property more useful or valuable; and (6) that is not an ordinary repair.”

City of Indianapolis v. Buschman, No. 49A02-1108-CT-782, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 26, 2012).

June 28, 2012 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Barnes

When a claimant’s tort claim notice contains a specific and definitive assessment of loss, recovery is limited to the loss described in the original notice, and if additional losses are discovered after the notice has been submitted then the claimant should amend the original notice or submit another notice in a timely manner.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 454
  • Page 455
  • Page 456
  • Page 457
  • Page 458
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 602
  • 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 © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs