• 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

Innovative Therapy Solutions Inc., v. Greenhill Manor Management, LLC, No. 19A-CC-1717, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 25, 2019).

November 25, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

Default judgment was not void for lack of personal jurisdiction because the complaint was missing the affidavit of debt; trial court properly issued a notice to the parties allowing plaintiff to submit an affidavit of debt without amending the complaint.

J.S. v. State, No. 19A-CR-733, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 13, 2019).

November 18, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

Where defendant filed a motion for indigent counsel but failed to appear at a hearing to consider that motion, trial court improperly denied his motion and required that he proceed pro se without giving sufficient warning about the perils of self-representation, and by not inquiring as to his indigency.

State v. Serrano, No. 19A-CR-305, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 13, 2019).

November 18, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Under the new-crime exception to the rule excluding evidence obtained from an illegal warrantless search, if a defendant’s response is itself a new and distinct crime, then evidence of the new crime is admissible notwithstanding the prior illegal search.

Hernandez-Velazquez v. Hernandez, No. 18A-DR-3109, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 14, 2019).

November 18, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Trial court properly set aside property conveyances under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act to effectuate the division of marital assets during a divorce.

New v. State, No. 19A-CR-575, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 31, 2019).

November 4, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Defendant’s substantial rights were prejudiced by the trial court’s failure to give the proposed instruction that was a correct statement of law, was based upon the evidence, was not covered by other instructions, and was necessary to enable the jury to fairly consider defendant’s theory or defense.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 93
  • Go to page 94
  • Go to page 95
  • Go to page 96
  • Go to page 97
  • 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