Case was not preempted by ERISA when a health-care provider sued defendant health-insurance plans, which are governed by ERISA, allege they failed to pay agreed reimbursement rates for covered services under their plans.
G. Slaughter
Robertson v. State, No. 19S-PL-432, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 30, 2020).
For the claims to recover public funds pursuant to Ind. Code § 5-11-5-1(a), the limitations period begins to run only after the Office of the Indiana Attorney General receives a final, verified report from the State Board of Accounts. Claims pursuant to the Crime Victims Relief Act are governed by the discovery rule.
Perkins v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, No. 20S-CT-233, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 31, 2020).
Testimony compelled by a subpoena or other statutory duty is protected under the public policy exception to at-will employment.
Estabrook v. Mazak Corp., No. 19S-CQ-590, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 2, 2020).
Ind. Code 34-20-3-1(b) is a statute of repose that cannot be extended by a manufacturer’s post-delivery repair, refurbishment or reconstruction of the disputed product.
S.H. v. D.W., No. 19S-PO-118, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 31, 2020).
The Protection Order Act does not permit the reissuance, renewal, or extension of the protective order when there has been a single episode of physical violence with no follow-up act, no threat that the violence will recur, and no other reasonable grounds to believe there is present intent to harm.