The clear and convincing evidence burden of proof in termination of parental rights cases satisfies the Indiana Constitution’s Due Course of Law Clause.
Stabosz v. Friedman, No. 22A-PL-541, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 22, 2022).
When a defendant moves to dismiss a case under Indiana’s anti-SLAPP statute, the motion is treated as a motion for summary judgment with the same burden of proof as a motion for summary judgment. The designated evidence must demonstrate as a matter of law that the statements were made in good faith and with a reasonable basis in law and fact.
L.W. v. State, No. 22A-JV-1138, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 23, 2022).
Ind. Code § 31-32-5-1 mandates that before consent may be established for purposes of a blood draw, a juvenile must be advised, and provided the opportunity, to have meaningful consultation with their parent/guardian.
Lake Cnty. Bd. of Comm’rs v. Lake Cnty. Sheriff, No. 22A-PL-1559, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 16, 2022).
County sheriff has the authority to enter into contracts related to the operation of the jail and the care of its inmates.
Lake Ridge Sch. Corp. v. Holcomb, No. 22A-PL-423, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 9, 2022).
Political subdivisions, such as a school corporation, may not assert takings claims against the State.