• 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

Lakes v. Grange Mutual Casualty Co., No. 89A05-1009-CT-549, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2011)

March 4, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

Ind. Code § 27-7-5-4(b) requires a per person liability limit comparison to determine underinsurance, and the mandatory per person limit for underinsured coverage pursuant to Ind. Code § 27-7-5-2 is $50,000.

B&B, LLC v. Lake Erie Land Co., No. 45A04-1002-PL-183, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2011)

March 4, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

A landowner, who raises the subterranean water table on his land and creates a federally regulated wetland, may not invoke the common enemy doctrine of water diversion and shield himself from liability to adjoining landowners whose property also became federally regulated wetlands.

Boss v. State, No. 49A02-1002-CR-225, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 18, 2011)

February 25, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

As dog bite and dog control ordinances defendant admitted violating were not criminal, the ordinance judgments did not bar defendant’s prosecution for animal bite and failure to immunize from rabies misdemeanors even though all were based on the same conduct.

Burke v. State, No. 49A02-1006-CR-660, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 21, 2011)

February 25, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Sentence enhancement for burglary of a structure used for religious worship does not violate federal Constitution’s Establishment Clause or Indiana Constitution’s prohibition of government preference for a particular religion.

State v. Velasquez, No. 53A05-1003-CR-194, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 22, 2011)

February 25, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Darden

Trial court did not err by giving a preliminary instruction on State’s anticipated use of character evidence. Licensed social worker providing treatment to child victim properly could testify as to victim’s statements to her which the worker or another could rely on to give treatment, even though the worker said she did not make diagnoses. Statutory prohibition of licensed clinical social worker’s giving opinion testimony did not preclude worker’s being qualified as an expert or giving factual testimony.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 331
  • Go to page 332
  • Go to page 333
  • Go to page 334
  • Go to page 335
  • 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