Trial Rule 26(B)(3) provides adequate guidance for the trial court to determine—on a case-by-case basis—whether a police report is protectible work product; overruling State ex rel. Keaton v. Cir. Ct. of Rush Cnty., 475 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. 1985).
Newcomb, Jr. v. State, No. 22A-PC-318, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2022).
A miscarriage of justice, including when a person is convicted of an offense they did not commit, can be corrected within the confines of post-conviction relief.
624 Broadway, LLC v. Gary Housing Auth., No. 22S-CT-140, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 29, 2022).
When city only provided notice of the taking and its hearings by publication, even though it knew how to provide personal notice, it deprived the property owner of a meaningful damages hearing.
Saucerman v. State, No. 22A-CR-501, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 17, 2022).
A trial court’s failure to ensure that a probationer who admits to a probation violation has received the advisements as required under Ind. Code § 35-38-2-3(e) constitutes a fundamental violation of the probationer’s due process rights.
William F. Braun Milk Hauling, Inc. v. Malanowski, No. 22A-CT-333, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 27, 2022).
Complaint was timely filed because the statute of limitations was tolled in 2020 by the Supreme Court’s orders regarding Covid-19.