• 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

Appeals

Kelly v. State, No. 24A-CT-859, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 23, 2024).

December 30, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Foley

The State is not obligated to defend and indemnify a former state agency employee for civil liability stemming from employee’s criminal conduct.

In re Adoption of R.G.B., No. 24A-CT-859, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 23, 2024).

December 30, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Waiver of the home study requirement in an adoption when the adoptive parents are not a stepparent or the grandparents is reversible error.

Cohen v. State, No. 24A-CR-710, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 23, 2024).

December 30, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown

Once a defendant demonstrates that they have testified pursuant to a grant of immunity to matters related to the prosecution before a grand jury, the State has the burden of showing an independent, legitimate source for the disputed evidence if the defendant/witness is the target of the same grand jury.

Helvie v. State, No. 24A-CR-1441, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 16, 2024).

December 16, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Indiana Criminal Rule 3.3(C)(1) provides, in part, that a “defendant may plead guilty to all charged offenses without a plea agreement or to at least one of the charged offenses pursuant to a plea agreement negotiated with the state.” Therefore, absent a plea agreement, the Rule’s language precludes a defendant from pleading guilty to anything less than all of the charges.

England v. Siebe, No. 24A-CT-497, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 4, 2024).

December 9, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

Trial court properly granted TR 21(B)(1) motion for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction when plaintiff’s claim fell under the Worker’s Compensation Act. Plaintiff was an employee of defendant’s sibling corporation and the Act defines “employer” to expressly include “a parent corporation and its subsidiaries,” which “shall each be considered joint employers” of the injured employee.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 11
  • Page 12
  • Page 13
  • Page 14
  • Page 15
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 408
  • 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 © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs