Savings clause for 2014 penal reforms does not violate the Indiana Constitution’s Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause.
E. Friedlander
Grant v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co., No. 49A05-1404-MF-139, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 6, 2015).
Plaintiff improperly attempted to circumvent the trial court’s T.R. 41 ruling by filing a new complaint raising identical legal and factual issues.
Bisard v. State, No. 02A03-1312-CR-492, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 4, 2015).
Trial court’s indication it would consider defendant’s use of certain evidence as opening the door to evidence of defendant’s subsequent criminal conduct was not a ruling admitting the subsequent conduct into evidence, so that defendant’s failure to present his evidence and obtain an actual ruling on an objection to the subsequent conduct evidence did not preserve the issue for appeal.
Miller v. Danz, No. 49A05-1401-PL-45, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 11, 2015).
“T.R. 17(F) permits the insertion of the name of a real party in interest ‘at any time.’ In cases where the statute of limitation has expired and the opposing party raises the expiration of the statute of limitations as an affirmative defense, T.R. 15(C) provides the framework for determining whether the complaint against the now-named party, as amended pursuant to T.R. 17(F), relates back.”
Jones v. State, No. 49A02-1406-CR-383, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 30, 2014).
D felony assisting a criminal does not require State to prove defendant knew the level or type of felony the assisted person committed.