• 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

Calvary Temple Church of Evansville, Inc. v. Kirsch, No. 24S-CT-378, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 11, 2025).

February 17, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, Supreme

For church premises liability, “premises” includes the whole parcel of land, and the church has limited premises liability so long as the parcel is “owned, operated, or controlled by the nonprofit religious organization and used primarily for worship services.”

Flowers v. State, No. 24A-CR-1219, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2025).

February 3, 2025 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

The abuse of discretion standard of review applies to the review of trial court bond forfeiture rulings.

Graff v. State, No. 23A-CR-2546, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2025).

February 3, 2025 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Where a suspect has not been arrested, arraigned or indicted, a polygraph examination and post-testing interrogation do not constitute critical stages upon which the right to counsel attaches. Evidence that a polygraph examination directly preceded a confession, occurred in the exact same room, and involved the same officer to which the confession was given may be admissible. Consistent with Indiana Rule of Evidence 106, the preliminaries to a polygraph examination, the examination itself, and the subsequent police interview are all part of one recorded statement, and fairness dictates that neither party should be able to decide that the jury will hear only the parts of the statement it deems favorable to its case.

Automotive Finance Corp. v. Liu, No. 24S-CC-223, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 23, 2025).

January 27, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, L. Rush, Supreme

Trial court could not use Trial Rule 60(B)(3) to grant relief on grounds that the defendant could have raised in a motion to correct error.

Waggoner v. Anonymous Healthcare System, Inc., No. 24A-CT-469, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 23, 2025).

January 27, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

In a medical malpractice case, trial court could not address whether healthcare provider was statutorily immune from liability as a preliminary question of law.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 586
  • 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 © 2025 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs