• 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

B. Dickson

In re T.S., No. 46S04-0904-JV-160, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Apr. 17, 2009)

April 24, 2009 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: B. Dickson, Supreme

(1) Indiana Appellate Rule 14.1’s expedited appeals are available to the process of modifying dispositional decrees regarding child placement where a juvenile court does not follow DCS’s recommendation; (2) the juvenile court must accept DCS’s placement recommendations unless it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the recommendation is “unreasonable” or “contrary to the welfare and best interests of the child”; (3) a finding by the juvenile court that DCS’s recommendation is unreasonable or contrary to the child’s welfare and best interests is reviewed on appeal for clear error; and (4) the juvenile court’s placement determination in this case was not clearly erroneous.

State v. Manuwal, No. 50S05-0805-CR-269, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Apr. 8, 2009)

April 9, 2009 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: B. Dickson, Supreme

The operating while intoxicated offense applies to an individual driving on his own private property.

Butler v. Indiana Dep't of Ins., No. 49S05-0805-CV-216, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Apr. 7, 2009)

April 9, 2009 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: B. Dickson, Supreme

Under Ind. Code § 34-23-1-2 (1999) on the wrongful death of unmarried adults with no dependents, if medical providers issue statements of charges for health care services but thereafter accept a reduced amount in full satisfaction of the charges due to contractual arrangements with the patient’s health insurers, Medicare, or Medicaid, the amount recoverable for reasonable medical and hospital expenses necessitated by the alleged wrongful conduct is the total amount ultimately accepted after such contractual adjustments, not the total of charges billed.

Tyler v. State, No. 69S04-0801-CR-3, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Mar. 31, 2009)

April 3, 2009 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: B. Dickson, F. Sullivan, T. Boehm

[A] party may not introduce testimony via the Protected Person Statute if the same person testifies in open court as to the same matters.

McCullough v. State, No. 49S02-0809-CR-508, __ N.E.2d (Ind., Feb. 10, 2009)

February 13, 2009 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: B. Dickson, Supreme, T. Boehm

(1) in the exercise of the appellate authority to review and revise criminal sentences, a court may decrease or increase the sentence; (2) the State may not by appeal or cross-appeal initiate a challenge to a sentence imposed by a trial court; and (3) if a defendant seeks appellate review and revision of a sentence, the State may respond and urge the imposition of a greater sentence without the necessity of proceeding by cross-appeal.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 22
  • Go to page 23
  • Go to page 24
  • Go to page 25
  • 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