• 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

In re F.S., No. 13A01-1505-JM-363, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 12, 2016).

May 16, 2016 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

DCS is not required to conduct an interview with a child as part of its assessment, but the trial court may issue such an order if the parent does not consent and DCS shows good cause on the record supporting its request for an interview.

Schuck v. State, No. 73A01-1507-CR-981, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 4, 2016).

May 9, 2016 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

Investigatory costs should be reimbursed because investigation was necessary even though defendant pleaded guilty.

Barany v. State, No. 17A04-1510-CR-1734, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 4, 2016).

May 9, 2016 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Trial court properly denied defendant’s request for return of the firearm used to commit murder; defendant cannot profit from sale of murder weapon.

Belork v. Latimer, No. 75A04-1503-MI-100, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 5, 2016).

May 9, 2016 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, P. Riley

“[A]djoining parcel owners can treat a fence not initially constructed on the true property line between their parcels as a partition fence, and in that circumstance the fence will be considered a partition fence for purposes of the maintenance and repair requirements and cost-sharing provisions of the partition fence statute.”

Hill v. Gephart, No. 49A02-1509-CT-1288, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 6, 2016).

May 9, 2016 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, P. Mathias

Although proof of the violation of a safety regulation creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence, it is a question for the jury whether the violation may be excused or justified because the actions might be reasonably expected by a person of ordinary prudence, acting under similar circumstances, who desired to comply with the law.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 197
  • Go to page 198
  • Go to page 199
  • Go to page 200
  • Go to page 201
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 405
  • 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