The trial court did not abuse its discretion by giving preclusive effect to the Marion County Probate Court’s 2012 age-change order and the March 7, 2017, order reaffirming same, thus preventing the State from relitigating the alleged victim’s age; and the trial court did not err in dismissing multiple counts against the defendants because the charges were filed outside of the five-year statute of limitations period.
Appeals
Denman v. St. Vincent Medical Group, Inc., No. 20A-PL-1236, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 18, 2021).
The Supreme Court’s emergency orders, issued because of COVID, did not toll the accrual of post-judgment interest.
Johnson v. Harris, No. 20A-CT-2384, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 23, 2021).
The Child Wrongful Death Statute (CWDS) does not authorize a personal representative to file a wrongful death claim for a child when a claim was never filed by the deceased parent. The legislative intent of the CWDS was to give parents the exclusive right to file a wrongful death action, except where both parents lacked custody of the child at the time of the child’s death.
Stott v. State, 20A-CR-1924, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 13, 2021).
To establish admissibility based on the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule, witnesses’ statements to police officers in a recording must demonstrate, among other things, contemporaneity between the events perceived and the declarations about those events. Moreover, it is the proponent’s burden to establish the strong showing of authenticity and competency for the admissibility of photographs used as substantive evidence under the silent-witness theory.
Page v. State, 21A-CR-90, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 6, 2021).
The “valid prescription” requirement is intended to assure the prescription was not obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, or deceit and thus, an expired prescription is still a “valid prescription” under Ind. Code § 35-48-4-6(a).