• 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

G. Slaughter

AMW Investments, Inc. v. Town of Clarksville, No. 24S-PL-183, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 4, 2024).

December 9, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, Supreme

Appealing a monetary discovery sanction also puts the underlying discovery order before the appellate court. Late objections to discovery are presumptively waived, but trial courts may exercise their discretion and excuse any waiver.

Perdue Farms, Inc. v. L&B Transport, LLC, No. 24S-PL-40, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 13, 2024).

August 19, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, L. Rush, Supreme

Forum selection clause cannot be enforced against non-contracting employees for claims against them arising from the contract.

Dolsen v. VeoRide, Inc., No. 24S-PL-75, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 2, 2024).

July 8, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, Supreme

To determine premises-liability for first-responding firefighters, first the Court should determine whether the plaintiff seeks to recover for the negligence that caused the emergency. If so, the first-responder’s rule bars the plaintiff’s claim. If not, then the Court should treat the firefighter as a licensee.

Grimes v. State, No. 24S-CR-217, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 26, 2024).

July 1, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Goff, G. Slaughter, Supreme

When a trial court postpones a criminal trial due to congestion and the defendant objects, a reviewing court applies a burden-shifting test. The test first gives deference to the trial court’s initial finding of congestion. But if the defendant presents a prima facie case that the court’s congestion finding is inaccurate, the burden shifts to the trial court to explain why its calendar required continuing the trial. If the court fails to meet its burden, the defendant is entitled to have the State’s claim against him dismissed or discharged.

Foster v. First Merchants Bank, N.A., No. 24S-PL-75, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 27, 2024).

July 1, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, L. Rush, Supreme

Even though plaintiff had not taken any action in a case for over a decade, because the defendant moved for dismissal under T.R. 41(E) after the plaintiff had resumed prosecution, the trial court improperly dismissed the case.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 20
  • 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