Ind. Code 32-30-1-5, the statute of repose, does not apply in plaintiff’s negligence suit; plaintiff was not alleging deficiency in the design or construction to support her claim, but was alleging breach of the duty to protect invitees from a dangerous condition of the premises.
Price v. Kuchaes, No. 45A04-1007-CT-467, ___ N.E.2d___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 8, 2011)
Plaintiff was divested of standing to pursue his action while his bankruptcy was pending, but the bankruptcy’s dismissal before the trial court ruled on either party’s motion for summary judgment returned ownership of the action to him and plaintiff then had standing to pursue the action.
Sloan v. State, No. 18S04-1009-CR-502, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., June 1, 2011)
“[O]nce concealment has been established, statutes of limitations for criminal offenses are tolled under Indiana Code section 35-41-4-2(h) (2008) until a prosecuting authority becomes aware or should have become aware of sufficient evidence to charge the defendant.”
Vance v. State, 18A04-1011-CR-701, __N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 1, 2011)
RILEY, J STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellant-Defendant, Eddie Vance, Jr. (Vance), appeals the trial court’s decision to recommit him to the Department of Correction (DOC) following a guilty plea. We affirm.
Ault v. State, No. 49A04-1008-CR-492, __N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 2, 2011)
Defendant’s testimony is not necessary for establishing self-defense, but defendant’s subjective state of mind may be inferred from the circumstances to establish self-defense.