The trial court properly appointed a special master pursuant to Indiana Commercial Court Rule 5 and T.R. 70 to take the necessary steps to satisfy a party’s contractual obligations.
C. Bradford
Budimir v. State, No. 23A-CR-17, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 23, 2023).
It is a violation of Article 1, section 11 of the Indiana Constitution for an officer who subsequently arrives on scene to detain, and search an individual, without any additional evidence of suspicion, after that individual was released by an officer who was previously on scene.
In re Estate of Bricker, No. 23A-ES-3, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 23, 2023).
Property subject to transfer on death is not to be considered part of the decedent’s “net personal and real estate” for purposes of the Spousal Inheritance Statute.
In re K.G., No. 22A-MI-502, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 6, 2022).
Trial court did not have the statutory authority to grant request to amend child’s birth certificate to change child’s gender marker.
Stabosz v. Friedman, No. 22A-PL-541, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 22, 2022).
When a defendant moves to dismiss a case under Indiana’s anti-SLAPP statute, the motion is treated as a motion for summary judgment with the same burden of proof as a motion for summary judgment. The designated evidence must demonstrate as a matter of law that the statements were made in good faith and with a reasonable basis in law and fact.