The process for having a federal right to possess firearms restored following a conviction of a crime of domestic violence is tied to the state procedure for having said right restore; that procedure in Indiana is conducted pursuant to Ind. Code § 35-47-4-7.
Appeals
Tippecanoe School Corp. v. Reynolds, No. 21A-CT-1482, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 7, 2022).
Negligent supervision in sports is not a separate cause of action; an analysis of a coach’s individual actions related to supervising her athletes and the choices made are subsumed by a review of whether that coach was intentional or reckless in her conduct.
Yeary v. State, No. 21A-CR-1080, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 7, 2022).
The plain language of the drug-induced homicide statute, Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1.5, requires the State to prove the defendant’s conduct is both the proximate cause and the actual cause of the victim’s death, and while the jury is expected to rely on its collective common sense and knowledge acquired through everyday experiences, the trial court has a duty to define for the jury words of a technical or legal meaning normally not understood by jurors unversed in the law.
Fedij v. State, No. 21A-CR-1481, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 11, 2022).
Unlike the labels on regulated pharmaceuticals, or warnings on products containing dangerous ingredients, nothing in the writing or symbols of cannabis-based products provide a detailed analysis of the products’ chemical compositions, their directions for use, or specific warnings from their misuse. Therefore, the market reports exception to the hearsay rule (Evidence Rule 803(17)) does not appeal to the writing or symbols on a cannabis-based package.
PNC Bank, N.A. v, Page, No. 21A-MF-1974, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 31, 2022).
The orders issued during COVID-19 pausing the accrual of interest did not suspend the automatic accrual of non-discretionary interest provided by the terms of a private loan instrument and as permitted by statute.