A proposed complaint before the IDOI is not void ab initio because it was filed in the name of a deceased individual as administrator of the estate of a deceased alleged victim of malpractice.
Appeals
A.S. v. Ind. Dept. of Child Services., No. 20A-JT-1525,__ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 30, 2021).
A successor judge who did not hear the evidence can still certify the recreated record created pursuant to Ind. App. Rule 31.
State v. Neukam, 20A-CR-2006, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 20, 2021).
The Indiana General Assembly has not yet provided the statutory authority to grant subject matter jurisdiction to an adult criminal court in the situation where the adult criminal court is aware that an individual is alleged to have committed a delinquent act of child molesting when he was under eighteen (a child) but is twenty-one or older at the time the State seeks to file charges against him.
Davis v. State, 21A-CR-52, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 15, 2021).
Revision of a sentence under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) requires the appellant to demonstrate that his sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender; failure to address both prongs results in waiver of appropriateness review.
Holsten v. Faur, No. 20A-CT-2072, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 8, 2021).
If medical malpractice plaintiff’s proposed complaint for the medical review panel does not encompass a particular theory of negligence, the trial court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over that theory of negligence.