• 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

Knoebel v. Clark County Superior Court No. 1, No. 22A01-0808-CV-384, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 17, 2009)

February 20, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Probation officer demoted from chief probation officer status was not entitled to retain the salary increase for a chief probation officer.

R.W. v. State, No. 31A05-0803-JV-161, __ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 19, 2009)

February 20, 2009 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Delinquency initial hearing record did not show juvenile was given a meaningful opportunity to confer with his parent before they waived his right to counsel.

State v. Brown, No. 38A05-0810-CR-573, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 9, 2009)

February 13, 2009 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: J. Kirsch, Supreme

After officers had completed their response to a complaint about a noisy party and were leaving the site, their demand to see the license of a motorist who was arriving at the party was an unreasonable search under the Indiana Constitution.

McCullough v. State, No. 49S02-0809-CR-508, __ N.E.2d (Ind., Feb. 10, 2009)

February 13, 2009 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: B. Dickson, Supreme, T. Boehm

(1) in the exercise of the appellate authority to review and revise criminal sentences, a court may decrease or increase the sentence; (2) the State may not by appeal or cross-appeal initiate a challenge to a sentence imposed by a trial court; and (3) if a defendant seeks appellate review and revision of a sentence, the State may respond and urge the imposition of a greater sentence without the necessity of proceeding by cross-appeal.

Indianapolis Marion County Public Library v. Charlier Clark & Linnard P.C., No. 06A05-0804-CV-239, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 6, 2009)

February 13, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, J. Baker

Because plaintiff’s claims were for economic losses that arose from plaintiff’s complaint that it did not receive the benefit of its bargain, the damages claimed were not recoverable in tort and were best relegated to contract law.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 580
  • Go to page 581
  • Go to page 582
  • Go to page 583
  • Go to page 584
  • 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