• 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

Gray v. State, No. 82A01-1005-CR-223, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 8, 2011)

March 11, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, J. Kirsch

Evidence of constructive possession of marijuana, found in defendant’s house under her coffee table next to two juveniles on the couch, was insufficient to convict.

White v. State, No. 15A01-1008-CR-463, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 9, 2011)

March 11, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

Record of defendant’s felony conviction reached in another state when he was fifteen years old was insufficient to support habitual offender finding without additional evidence on the other state’s procedures assuring that he was convicted as an adult.

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.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 335
  • Go to page 336
  • Go to page 337
  • Go to page 338
  • Go to page 339
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 404
  • 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