Social Security Administration has exclusive authority over the issues of benefit misuse by representative payees and over the recovery of those misused funds; a trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
Appeals
Ind. Dept. of Ins. v. Doe, No. 22A-CT-1276, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 2, 2023).
An underlying act of medical malpractice is a necessary predicate and condition precedent to a medical credentialing malpractice claim.
Where the Patient’s Compensation Fund is not a party to a settlement agreement between the claimant and the provider and the court must consider the liability of the health care provider as “admitted and established,” the Fund is not precluded from making an independent determination and may dispute whether the underlying conduct is compensable under the Act. The Fund does not have an affirmative duty to intervene in settlement negotiations between a claimant and a provider or to address a claim for excess damages until the claim has been filed in court.
Trejo v. State, No. 22A-CR-1817, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 2, 2023).
Lack of volition is not a defense to an alleged probation violation.
Norton v. State, No. 22A-CR-2314, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 23, 2023).
There is no provision of the appellate rules which permits trial courts to expand the time limit in which to seek appeal as prescribed by Appellate Rule 9
Moore v. State, No. 22A-CR-1979, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 26, 2023).
In distinguishing between the odor of marijuana and hemp for purposes of determining whether there was probable cause to search a vehicle, courts apply the “fair probability” test. Although it may equally possible that a strong odor emanating from a vehicle may be hemp just as marijuana, circumstances may create a fair probability—that is, “a substantial chance”—that the vehicle contains contraband.