Under Indiana’s “going-and-coming” rule, an employee driving to and from work is generally not acting within the scope of his employment, in which case the employer is not vicariously liable for the employee’s negligence under principles of respondeat superior. An exception to this rule arises if the employee is performing work assigned by the employer or is subject to the employer’s control.
C. Goff
Indiana Dept. of Educ. v. Mt. Zion’s Loving Day Care Ministry, et. al., No. 26S-PL-134, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Oct. 26, 2026).
The Department of Education’s blanket policy of rejecting correction proposals by CACFP participants once a deficiency recurs, despite its authority to exercise such discretion under federal law, was arbitrary and capricious.
Monroe v. State, No. 26S-CR-208, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 29, 2026).
Tumulty’s bar on direct appeals from guilty pleas applies to double-jeopardy challenges to convictions entered on a guilty plea, so the defendant generally must proceed via post-conviction relief rather than a direct appeal. But a defendant may obtain direct appellate review by moving to withdraw the guilty plea as to the lesser-included offense (and asking the trial court to vacate that conviction) and then appealing the denial of that motion.
Wike, et al. v. Grandview Solar Project, et. al., No. 26S-PL-192, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 24, 2026).
Normally, challenges to a board of zoning appeals’ decision need to be brought within 30 days of the decision. But Indiana recognizes the ultra vires doctrine, which, applied here, says some board of zoning appeals’ actions might be void, meaning they are vulnerable to a lawsuit at any time, even long after the normal window for review has closed.
Ortiz v. State, No. 25S-CR-303, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 19, 2026).
A defendant’s “eligibility” for a belated appeal rests not on whether his petition alleges a meritorious claim, but on whether the claim would overcome an appeal waiver if timely brought on direct appeal.