• 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

Renner v. Shepard-Bazant, No. 21S-CT-138, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 31, 2021).

September 7, 2021 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, Supreme

In a bench trial, a party arguing for a mitigation-of-damages jury instruction “need only point to some evidence in the record that when viewed most favorably [to the party] would suffice for a reasonable juror to decide the issue in the party’s favor.”

Blackford v. Welborn Clinic, No. 21S-CT-85, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 31, 2021).

September 7, 2021 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, Supreme

The Indiana Business Trust Act’s limitation period is a statute of repose and fraudulent concealment may not extend the time in which to file a claim.

State v. Barnett, No. 20A-CR-2144, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 25, 2021).

August 30, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

The trial court did not abuse its discretion by giving preclusive effect to the Marion County Probate Court’s 2012 age-change order and the March 7, 2017, order reaffirming same, thus preventing the State from relitigating the alleged victim’s age; and the trial court did not err in dismissing multiple counts against the defendants because the charges were filed outside of the five-year statute of limitations period.

In re Change of Name and Gender of H.S., No. 21A-MI-884, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 30, 2021).

August 30, 2021 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: M. Bailey, R. Pyle, T. Crone

When a parent seeks a change of gender marker for a child, it must be accompanied by a best interests analysis and include more than conclusory testimony.

Denman v. St. Vincent Medical Group, Inc., No. 20A-PL-1236, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 18, 2021).

August 23, 2021 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

The Supreme Court’s emergency orders, issued because of COVID, did not toll the accrual of post-judgment interest.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 87
  • Go to page 88
  • Go to page 89
  • Go to page 90
  • Go to page 91
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 586
  • 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