• 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

DeGrado v. DeGrado, No. 24A-DC-187, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 3, 2024).

September 9, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

Extracurricular expense payments are child support. Petition to modify child support put parent on notice that extracurricular expenses were at issue.

Anderson v. State, No. 23A-CR-02609, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 4, 2024).

September 9, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Foley

The grand jury statutory framework does not mandate that the State submit a matter for deliberation as to whether to issue an indictment. The State need not identify or name the target of the grand jury proceeding and identify the crime that the target was alleged to have committed unless the grand jury proceeds to deliberate on whether to issue an indictment.

Seabolt, Dillard, Tyson, and Robinson v. State, No. 24S-PC-270, 24S-PC-271, 24S-PC-272, 24S-PC-273, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 20, 2024).

August 26, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, D. Molter

Once a judge concludes their recusal is mandatory, they must continue recusing in future cases when confronted with the same concern that led them to recuse in the prior case. That is, unless their prior recusal was mistaken or circumstances have changed so that their recusal is no longer mandatory, in which case they again have a duty to preside.

In re Paternity of E.B.K., No. 23A-JP-2316, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 14, 2024).

August 19, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas, T. Crone

The thirty-seven-month time period between the temporary custody order and the permanent custody order was an extraordinary delay that prejudiced mother and violated her due process rights. Trial courts have a statutory duty under Ind. Code § 31-17-2-6 to expedite custody proceedings.

Frye v. State, No. 23A-CR-1691, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 31, 2024).

August 5, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

The ability to consent is a unifying theme to the separate situations of proscribed conduct constituting Level 3 felony rape; a defendant should be able to ask the alleged victim questions about their shared sexual history to determine whether there is any basis by which defendant could defend themselves by arguing the alleged were consensual.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Go to page 10
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 400
  • 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 © 2025 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs