• 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

Peters v. Girl Scouts of Southwest Ind., Inc., No. 23A-CT-1342, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2024).

March 4, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

Mother could add child’s guardian as a defendant under the Child Wrongful Death Statute, but both father and guardian were required to assert a claim within 2-years to be entitled to an apportionment of damages.

Davis-Brumley v. Fair Oaks Farms, LLC, No. 23A-CT-1610, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 29, 2024).

March 4, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

Wrongful death action was not timely filed when plaintiff petitioned to be appointed as special administratrix of the estate within the two-year filing period of the Wrongful Death Act, but the petition was not granted until after that period elapsed.

Marroquin v. Reagle, No. 23A-MI-2545, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 23, 2024).

February 26, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

When defendant was convicted of a crime in Indiana that does not require sex offender registration and then moves to a state that did require sex offender registration, the defendant is not required to register when moving back to Indiana.

Starr Indemnity & Liability Co. v. NIBCO, Inc., No. 23A-PL-1343, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2024).

February 26, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

When relief was not available under T.R. 60(B), the trial court could not reinstate the case because it failed to have a T.R. 41(E) hearing before the dismissal.

Morgan v. State, No. 23A-CR-1489, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 9, 2024).

February 12, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, R. Shepard

Under Indiana’s Red Flag Law, when a law enforcement officer seizes a firearm from an individual whom the law enforcement officer believes to be dangerous without first obtaining a warrant, the officer must submit an affidavit to a court describing why the officer believes the individual is dangerous. If the court finds probable cause exists to believe the individual is dangerous, the court shall order the law enforcement agency to retain the firearm. To sustain the dangerousness finding, the State must prove, at a hearing, by clear and convincing evidence material facts demonstrating the individual is dangerous.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 14
  • Go to page 15
  • Go to page 16
  • Go to page 17
  • Go to page 18
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 400
  • 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