A sentence is illegal if it is outside the prescribed statutory range or is unconstitutional. An appeal challenging an illegal sentence cannot be waived.
G. Slaughter
Baldwin v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., No. 25S-CT-33, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 21, 2025).
Slaughter, J. When insurance coverage is insufficient to satisfy multiple claimants, insurers face a dilemma. An insurer can seek individual settlements, but this approach risks exhausting policy limits before satisfying all claimants. Another option is to refrain from individual settlements in hopes of attaining a global settlement, but this approach may fail and expose the […]
Indianapolis Public Trans. Co. v. Bush, No. 25S-CT-245, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sept. 15, 2025).
When a party raises a TR 50(A) argument in a Rule 59(J) motion to correct error, the trial court reviews the evidence as if it were considering a TR 50(A) motion raised before judgment at trial; de novo review is appropriate. When the evidence heard by the jury supports reasonable inferences that defendant was not contributorily negligent, the trial court properly did not disturb the jury verdict.
Kelly v. Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, No. 25S-CT-158, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 23, 2025).
The Legislature has not created a private right of action for individuals to seek damages stemming from inaccurate BMV recordkeeping.
South Bend Comm. School Corp. v. Grabowski, No. 24S-CT-395, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 24, 2025).
A Frampton claim, an exception to Indiana’s employment-at-will doctrine. requires the claimant to prove that her employer actually or constructively discharged her solely to deter her from seeking workers’ compensation benefits.