• 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

Zavodnik v. Richards, No. 49A02-1209-CC-750, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., March 14, 2013).

March 14, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Barnes

When a trial court has involuntarily dismissed a case without prejudice pursuant to T. R. 41(E), T.R. 41(F) gives dismissing trial court the discretion to consider whether a complaint should be reinstated. Plaintiff should not file a substantially similar or identical complaint in another court.

Santiago v. State, No. 45A03-1207-CR-304, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 5, 2013).

March 8, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Taken as a whole, trial court’s presumption of innocence instructions were proper, even though they did not contain express direction that the jurors must fit the evidence to the presumption of innocence or reconcile the evidence on the theory defendant was innocent.

Brock v. State, No. 79A04-1208-CR-433, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2013).

February 28, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

Consecutivity for intimidation sentence enhanced with habitual offender status and for “progressive penalty statute” enhanced second-conviction auto theft did not violate the prohibition of “double enhancement” when the enhancements were not based on the same prior felony conviction.

Sparks v. State, No. 49A02-1207-CR-593, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2013).

February 28, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

When probationer heard judge say judge was inclined to impose a four year sentence if probationer admitted the violation and probationer then admitted, court’s imposition of a five year sentence without a hearing on the violation was fundamental error.

Turner v. Turner, No. 85A02-1208-DR-704,___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2013).

February 28, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, R. Pyle

The amended child support statute, Ind. Code § 31-16-6-6, trumps language in a dissolution decree providing that father was obligated to pay child support until son reached the age of twenty-one.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 286
  • Go to page 287
  • Go to page 288
  • Go to page 289
  • Go to page 290
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 406
  • 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