• 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. Friedlander

Morgan v. State, No. 49A04-1001-CR-43, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 13, 2010)

October 15, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

“[A] stipulation may be presented to the jury in the form of a preliminary instruction.”

Wolverine Mutual Insurance Co. v. Oliver, No. 20A03-1003-SC-162, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 9, 2010)

September 17, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

Given that Small Claims Rule 4(A) provides that the statute of limitations is “deemed at issue” and that the trial court asked if there was a limitations question at a point when plaintiff could still have litigated it, the court properly decided the case based on the statute of limitations even though defendant had not raised or argued it.

Fisher v. State, No. 10A01-1001-CR-21, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 30, 2010)

September 3, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

Defendant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated when he diligently attempted to be tried on Indiana charges while in federal custody for five years but State did not seek to have him tried under a policy not to return persons in another jurisdiction’s custody until their sentences were served in that jurisdiction.

Jones v. State, No. 27A02-1002-CR-168, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 7, 2010)

July 9, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

When the two convictions were based on controlled buys using the same informant and quantity of drugs and were arranged to occur at the same place and took place only two weeks apart, consecutive sentences were inappropriate.

Boone v. Boone, No. 45A03-0906-CV-243, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 31, 2010)

April 1, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander, E. Najam

Divorce court could not order support retroactive to a date seventeen months prior to the filing of the dissolution action.

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