• 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

Indiana Dept. of Ins. v. Everhart, No. 84A01-0912-CV-614, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 21, 2010)

July 23, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Sullivan

Trial court erred by awarding full damages rather than damages in proportion to the increased risk of harm resulting from medical malpractice.

Edwards v. State, No. 49A02-0911-CR-1093, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 13, 2010)

July 16, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Witnesses who testify that the defendant was not present at the scene, as opposed to affirmatively testifying he was at a different place, are not alibi witnesses for whom an alibi notice is required.

In re Subpoena to Crisis Connection, Inc., No. 19A05-0910-CR-602, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 15, 2010)

July 16, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Victim-advocate privilege may be limited by defendant’s constitutional rights, with a three-step test (particularity, relevance, no “paramount interest”) to be met by the defense before there will be an in camera review to determine what victim-advocate communications are to be disclosed.

Fidelity Nat'l Title Ins. Co. v. Mussman, No. 64A03-0905-CV-204, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 14, 2010)

July 16, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Title Company was Title Insurance Company’s agent for title insurance purposes, but not for closing and escrow purposes.

City of Greenwood v. Town of Bargersville, No. 41A05-0912-CV-684, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 15, 2010)

July 16, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

(1) City had standing to bring declaratory judgment action regarding the validity of Town’s annexation of territory within three miles of City; (2) landowners’ agreements that waived their “rights to object, remonstrate or appeal against [the] annexation,” did not constitute consent to the annexation.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 524
  • Go to page 525
  • Go to page 526
  • Go to page 527
  • Go to page 528
  • 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