Unlike the labels on regulated pharmaceuticals, or warnings on products containing dangerous ingredients, nothing in the writing or symbols of cannabis-based products provide a detailed analysis of the products’ chemical compositions, their directions for use, or specific warnings from their misuse. Therefore, the market reports exception to the hearsay rule (Evidence Rule 803(17)) does not appeal to the writing or symbols on a cannabis-based package.
Abbott v. State, No. 21S-PL-347, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 29, 2022).
David, J. In Indiana, civil forfeiture actions typically proceed under one of two statutes: the general forfeiture statute or the racketeering forfeiture statute. Today, we consider whether the racketeering forfeiture statute permits a court to release, to the defendant, funds seized in a forfeiture action so the defendant can hire counsel in that same action. […]
PNC Bank, N.A. v, Page, No. 21A-MF-1974, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 31, 2022).
The orders issued during COVID-19 pausing the accrual of interest did not suspend the automatic accrual of non-discretionary interest provided by the terms of a private loan instrument and as permitted by statute.
State v. Pemberton, No. 21A-CR-668, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 31, 2022).
Absent specific exceptions outlined by our legislature in other statutes, acts that would be criminal offenses if committed by adults are defined by Indiana law as delinquent acts when committed by individuals under age eighteen, and Indiana law gives exclusive jurisdiction of delinquency proceedings to juvenile courts.
Cruz v. Cruz, No. 21A-DN-1954, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 4, 2022).
Annulment and dissolution of marriage are separate causes of action; the trial court erred in finding an annulment petition was a mere amendment of the dissolution petition.