Under the Hague Convention, interests of children in matters relating to their custody are best served when decisions are made in the child’s country of habitual residence. Determination of a child’s habitual residence is fact-intensive and varies with the circumstances of each case.
B.M. v. A.J, No. 21A-PO-2290, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 29, 2022).
Trial court judge’s statements throughout protection order hearing demonstrate that judge failed to preside over the hearing as a neutral, impartial decision maker and violated defendants’ due process rights.
Legacy Builders Ind., Inc. v. Crocker No. 21A-CT-2255, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 29, 2022).
Trial court lacked personal jurisdiction over defendants because plaintiff failed to serve a summons with the complaint.
In re change of gender of O.J.G.S., No. 21A-MI-2096, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 2, 2022).
Ind. Code § 16-37-2-10 does not grant courts the authority to order a change of gender marker on a birth certificate.
Davis v. State, No. 21A-CR-2089, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 2, 2022).
Although Indiana Rule of Evidence 404(b) cases typically involve the issue of whether prior bad acts of the defendant are admissible, Rule 404(b) does not prohibit application to subsequent acts.