“[W]hether declining to attribute delay to the defendant for failing to arrange for his transportation from Department of Correction custody and to appear for his trial scheduled for January 23, 2013, or whether attributing such failures to the defendant under Rule (C) and permitting the trial court and the State a reasonable time thereafter to bring the defendant to trial, the defendant was entitled to discharge pursuant to Indiana Criminal Rule 4(C), and his motion should have been granted.”
B. Dickson
Gaff v. Indiana-Purdue University of Fort Wayne, No. 02S03-1604-PL-201, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 22, 2016).
“[W]hile the plaintiff’s cause of action arises under federal law, summary judgment proceedings arising under Indiana Trial Rule 56 are governed by Indiana summary judgment procedure and jurisprudence.”
Whistle Stop Inn, Inc. v. City of Indianapolis, No. 49S02-1604-MI-175, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 11, 2016).
Indianapolis’ non-smoking ordinance does not violate the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution.
Wahl v. State, Nos. 29S04-1510-CR-605 and 29S04-1510-CR-606, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., Mar. 15, 2016).
Alternate juror interjecting himself into deliberations was presumptively prejudicial, and State failed to rebut the presumption; therefore, new trial was required.
Myers v. Crouse-Hinds Division of Cooper Industries, Inc., No. 49S00-1502-MI-119, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 2, 2016).
The Indiana Product of Liability Act statute of repose does not apply in cases where there is prolonged exposure to inherently dangerous foreign substances like asbestos.