• 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

Tracy v. Morell, No. 59A01-1009-PL-488, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 19, 2011)

May 20, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Sale of tractor with altered identification number was subject to rescission on grounds of mistake and public policy, and buyer was entitled to recovery of payments with interest.

Cotton v. Cotton, No. 43A03-1005-DR-325 , ___ N.E.2d___, (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 24, 2011)

February 25, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Summons served on wife was insufficient as a matter of law for the court to exercise personal jurisdiction over defendant, because it neither complied with Trial Rule 4(C)(5) or due process. Due process requires that, at a minimum, a respondent in a dissolution proceeding be notified of the risk of default for failure to appear or otherwise respond.

Hurst v. State, No. 49A02-1004-CR-378, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 16, 2010)

December 17, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Showing the police his eleven year-old’s text message and photograph of purported marijuana in stepfather’s house sufficiently corroborated the reliability of father’s report to police of the daughter’s message to support a search warrant for the house.

R.R.F. v. L.L.F., No. 69A01-1001-DR-77, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 8, 2010)

October 15, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

When Mother would receive a $4,000 tax credit for her contributions to child’s college expenses, trial court erred under Support Guideline 8(b) in not giving Father a setoff against his share of the expenses to apportion the credit equitably.

Long v. State, No. 41A04-0912-CR-743, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2010)

October 7, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam, J. Kirsch

Evidence raised sufficient inference that purchaser under lease-to-purchase contract never intended to pay, so that proof purchaser took furnishings when he moved out sufficed, with intent inference, to prove crime of theft.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 22
  • Go to page 23
  • Go to page 24
  • Go to page 25
  • Go to page 26
  • 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