• 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

Capital Drywall Supply, Inc. v. Jai Jagdish, Inc., No. 71A03-1004-PL-189, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 29, 2010)

October 7, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam, J. Baker

“[A] mechanic’s lien claimant does not have a right to rely on telephone hearsay to identify the property owner and does so at its own risk.”

Donovan v. Grand Victoria Casino & Resort, L.P., No. 49S02-1003-CV-00124, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Sept. 30, 2010)

October 7, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: B. Dickson, F. Sullivan, Supreme

An Indiana casino may exclude an individual employing “card counting” techniques to improve her chance of winning.

Sheehan Construction Co., Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co., No. 49S02-1001-CV-32, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Sept. 30, 2010)

October 7, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: F. Sullivan, R. Rucker, R. Shepard, Supreme

“[A] standard commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurance policy covers an insured contractor for the faulty workmanship of its subcontractor.”

SPC Group, L.L.C. v. Dolson, Inc., No. 19A01-0912-CV-604, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2010)

October 7, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Mortgage granted by Holland as surety for a note was unenforceable when the mortgage provided incorrectly that Thompson was a co-maker of the note, when in fact Thompson was only a guarantor on the note.

Upshaw v. State, No. 49A02-1003-CR-239, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 22, 2010)

September 28, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

After defendant’s release on recognizance satisfied his initial C.R. 4(B) motion for speedy trial in 70 days, his “renewal” of his motion, after arrest on new charges and the revocation of his release on recognizance due to the new arrest, began a new 70 day period, not a resumption of the original 70 days.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 515
  • Go to page 516
  • Go to page 517
  • Go to page 518
  • Go to page 519
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 587
  • 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