• 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. Najam

Hill v. State, No. 48A02-1103-CR-179, __ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 25, 2011).

October 28, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Officer’s general concern about suspects having weapons and his dislike of suspects placing hands in their pockets did not support stop and frisk.

Plank v. Community Hospitals of Indiana, Inc., No. 49A04-1004-CT-25, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 25, 2011).

October 26, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam, J. Baker

Plaintiff is entitled to an evidentiary hearing about whether the state’s statutory cap on medical malpractice awards is unconstitutional.

Allen v. Clarian Health Partners, Inc., No. 49A02-1011-CT-117, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 12, 2011).

October 13, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

A complaint challenging reasonableness of the fees the defendant hospital charged the plaintiffs states a claim for breach of contract because no price was specified in the contracts; plaintiffs only agreed to pay a reasonable charge for defendant hospital’s services, and if the fees charged are unreasonable this would constitute a breach of contract.

Hundley v. State, No. 24A01-1010-CR-550, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 14, 2011).

July 15, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Entire weight of “pill dough” produced in intermediate step in methamphetamine manufacture was properly considered as methamphetamine in excess of 3 grams required for A felony manufacturing.

Perdue v. Greater Lafayette Health Services, Inc. d/b/a Home Hospital, No. 79A05-1011-CT-687, ___N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 8, 2011)

June 10, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Ind. Code 32-30-1-5, the statute of repose, does not apply in plaintiff’s negligence suit; plaintiff was not alleging deficiency in the design or construction to support her claim, but was alleging breach of the duty to protect invitees from a dangerous condition of the premises.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 21
  • Go to page 22
  • Go to page 23
  • Go to page 24
  • Go to page 25
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 28
  • 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