• 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

E. Brown

Sullivan v. State, 16A01-1512-CR-2175, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., July 8, 2016).

July 11, 2016 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown

Trial court abused its discretion in finding that defendant’s violation warranted revoking his community corrections placement and in ordering him to serve eighteen months in jail.

Staggs v. Buxbaum, No. 47A04-1510-PL-1758, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 28, 2016).

July 5, 2016 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown

Crime Victim Relief Act (CVRA) damages are distinct from common law punitive damages; court properly awarded CVRA damages after making an “assessment of criminality.”

Belork v. Latimer, No. 75A04-1503-MI-100, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 5, 2016).

May 9, 2016 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, P. Riley

“[A]djoining parcel owners can treat a fence not initially constructed on the true property line between their parcels as a partition fence, and in that circumstance the fence will be considered a partition fence for purposes of the maintenance and repair requirements and cost-sharing provisions of the partition fence statute.”

Hill v. Gephart, No. 49A02-1509-CT-1288, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 6, 2016).

May 9, 2016 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, P. Mathias

Although proof of the violation of a safety regulation creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence, it is a question for the jury whether the violation may be excused or justified because the actions might be reasonably expected by a person of ordinary prudence, acting under similar circumstances, who desired to comply with the law.

Luke v. State, No. 15A01-1409-CR-407, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 24, 2016).

February 29, 2016 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, R. Altice

Conviction for stalking four victims, based on conduct spanning January 2012 to February 2014, violated actual-evidence double jeopardy principles when defendant had been convicted a month earlier for invasion of privacy committed against three of the same victims for conduct spanning three days in January 2014. The State presented substantial evidence of the three-day course of conduct in the subsequent trial; and both cases alleged a violation of the same previously issued no-contact order.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 9
  • Go to page 10
  • Go to page 11
  • Go to page 12
  • Go to page 13
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 26
  • 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