Although evidence supports trial court’s determination that grandmother was de facto custodian, trial court was also required to make findings regarding its determination to award custody to grandmother.
Appeals
Nicevski v. Nicevski, No. 02A04-0904-CV-188, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 8, 2009)
In a dissolution case, trial court erred by including in the marital estate the value of a residence titled in husbandâ’s parents’ name, because his parents were not joined as necessary nonparties pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 7(B).
King v. State, No. 49A04-0810-CR-609, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2009)
Internet service provider’s business record of defendant’s internet account activity was inadmissible under Ev. Rule 803(6) when there was no verification by provider of personal information filled in by the one who established the account, leading to a “lack of trustworthiness” under the Rule.
Dowell v. State, No. 32A01-0810-PC-508, __ N.E.2D __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2009)
Applies “prison mailbox rule” to P-C.R. 1 proceedings.
In re N.S. and J.M., No. 32A05-0902-JV-78, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2009)
Trial court erred by ordering that DCS pay the GAL fees associated with the underlying CHINS proceedings; Indiana Code §§ 31-40-3-2 and 33-24-6-4 require that the county, not DCS, is responsible for the GAL fees.