• 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

McConnell v. Doan, No. 23A-CT-145, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 2023).

September 5, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

The trial court properly appointed a special master pursuant to Indiana Commercial Court Rule 5 and T.R. 70 to take the necessary steps to satisfy a party’s contractual obligations.

Budimir v. State, No. 23A-CR-17, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 23, 2023).

August 28, 2023 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

It is a violation of Article 1, section 11 of the Indiana Constitution for an officer who subsequently arrives on scene to detain, and search an individual, without any additional evidence of suspicion, after that individual was released by an officer who was previously on scene.

Kirby v. State, No. 22A-CR-2971, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 17, 2023).

August 21, 2023 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

While the silent witness theory’s foundation requirements are applicable when a video is admitted into evidence, the requirements also applicable when: (1) witnesses testified regarding the substance of a video; (2) the video recorded events that the witnesses themselves did not observe first-hand; and (3) the video was not offered into evidence.

Turner v. State, No. 22A-CR-2404, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 8, 2023).

August 14, 2023 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

An evidentiary harpoon occurs when the State deliberately places inadmissible evidence before the jury to prejudice the jurors against the defendant. Where an evidentiary harpoon has been introduced at trial, the reviewing court requires a high level of assurance that the irregularity did not affect the verdict before it will affirm the judgment. It is not enough that the verdict is supported by sufficient evidence; the reviewing court must be able to say with certainty that the improper testimony did not influence the verdict.

Garrett v. Nissan of Lafayette, LLC, No. 22A-CT-2583, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 11, 2023).

August 14, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Foley

Trial court properly denied motion to deem requests for admission as admitted. The purpose of Trial Rule 36 is to allow parties to stipulate matters which are not seriously in dispute, such as the authenticity of an exhibit.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 22
  • Go to page 23
  • Go to page 24
  • Go to page 25
  • Go to page 26
  • 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