• 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

C. Goff

Jennings v. Smiley, No. 24S-CT-186, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 24, 2025).

January 27, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, Supreme

The party seeking production of a smartphone must provide some evidence of the device’s use at a time when it could have been a contributing cause of the incident litigated and must describe the data sought with reasonable particularity.

In re Adoption of P.J.W., No. 24S-AD-117, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 9, 2025).

January 13, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, Supreme

For an adoption petition, trial courts should address a petitioner’s advanced age as to whether “the petitioner or petitioners for adoption are of sufficient ability to rear the child and furnish suitable support and education.”

Gierek v. Anonymous 1, No. 23S-CT-277, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 9, 2025).

January 13, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, G. Slaughter, Supreme

Class certification by the trial court is a proper preliminary determination under the Medical Malpractice Act (MMA). The MMA covers all claims for medical “malpractice” and is not limited to claims involving only bodily injury or death.

Bradley v. State, No. 24S-CR-206, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 18, 2024).

December 20, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Goff, Supreme

A trial court’s sua sponte order for a competency evaluation does not extinguish and reset time under Criminal Rule 4(B); so long as the defendant maintains a position reasonably consistent with his speedy-trial request, delays attributable to competency evaluations simply toll the applicable deadline.

Wohlt v. Wohlt, No. 24S-DR-385, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., Nov. 21, 2024).

November 25, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, Supreme

Property settlement agreement had no ambiguity when it used the word “all” to describe division of assets; both forgotten and remembered assets were included in that description so that the property division would be final.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 21
  • 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 © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs