• 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

M. Robb

D.C. v. State, No. 49A02-1002-JV-100, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 14, 2010)

October 22, 2010 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Delinquency disposition statutes do not allow juvenile court to order both determinate and indeterminate commitments to DOC.

Bandini v. Bandini, No. 49A04-1001-DR-26, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 8, 2010)

October 15, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

“[A] military spouse may not, by a post-decree waiver of retirement pay in favor of disability benefits or CRSC [Combat Related Special Compensation], unilaterally and voluntarily reduce the benefits awarded the former spouse in a dissolution decree.”

SPC Group, L.L.C. v. Dolson, Inc., No. 19A01-0912-CV-604, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2010)

October 7, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Mortgage granted by Holland as surety for a note was unenforceable when the mortgage provided incorrectly that Thompson was a co-maker of the note, when in fact Thompson was only a guarantor on the note.

Hatter v. Pierce Mfg., Inc., No. 49A02-0907-CV-659, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 7, 2010)

September 17, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Failure to use the last peremptory against either of the two jurors a party complained should have been dismissed for cause required the party to show the failure to dismiss both of the jurors was erroneous, when court had made the entire venire available for challenges for cause before requiring peremptories to be exercised.

City of Indianapolis v. Hicks, No. 49A02-1002-CT-95, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 10, 2010)

August 16, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

(1) City waived its challenge based on the magistrate’s lack of authority to grant Plaintiff’s motion to correct error by failing to object until after time for ruling on the motion expired; (2) waiver notwithstanding, trial court properly used a nunc pro tunc order to grant Plaintiff’s motion, because the CCS provides a sufficient written memorial indicating the trial court adopted the magistrate’s recommendation within the required time.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 24
  • Go to page 25
  • Go to page 26
  • Go to page 27
  • Go to page 28
  • Go to page 29
  • 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