A Frampton claim, an exception to Indiana’s employment-at-will doctrine. requires the claimant to prove that her employer actually or constructively discharged her solely to deter her from seeking workers’ compensation benefits.
Abbas v. Neter-Nu, No. 24S-CT-435, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 24, 2025).
The trial court erred by inviting the jury to find the hospital liable independent of its vicarious liability for the actions of the nurse and doctor, but joint-and-several liability precluded the need for reversal of the jury verdict.
White v. State, No. 24A-CR-2592, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 25, 2025).
Our Supreme Court’s double jeopardy analysis in Powell applies where the question is whether the State has alleged or shown discrete, prosecutable acts under identical statutory language, and our Supreme Court’s analysis in Wadle applies where the question is whether the State has alleged or used the same evidence to show violations of different statutory language. However, in certain circumstances, both Wadle and Powell may apply.
Peters v. Quakenbush, No. 25S-PL-152, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 19, 2025).
If a person “is required to register as a sex or violent offender in any jurisdiction,” that person must “register for the period required by the other jurisdiction or the period described in this section, whichever is longer.” I.C. § 11-8-8-19(f). This applies to a person residing, working, or attending school in Indiana even though that person committed no offense in the other jurisdiction that imposed the triggering registration requirement.
Thomas v. Foyst, No.25S-MI-148, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 19, 2025).
The only statutory authority for a court to set aside election results is through an election contest. A declaratory judgment action filed before the election did not preserve the candidacy challenge.