• 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

N.E. v. L.W., No. 18A-PO-2514, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 14, 2019).

June 17, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

The trial court erred in denying petition for a protection order on grounds that a no-contact order was in place.

Redington v. State, No. 18A-CR-950, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 5, 2019).

April 8, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

When a person petitions for the return of guns confiscated under the Jake Laird “red flag” Law for being a dangerous person, the State must present evidence that the person is dangerous now and, in the future, not that he was dangerous in the past.

Rose v. Martin’s Super Markets LLC, No. 18A-CT-1654, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2019).

March 4, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

Grocery store had no duty to customer prior to shooting, because it was not reasonably foreseeable for a grocery store to expect death by gunfire to befall a customer. Because the grocery store did not have knowledge of customer’s injury in time to offer her assistance, the store also had no duty to protect her from exacerbation of her injuries.

In re Ma.H, No. 18A-JT-1296, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 18, 2019).

February 18, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. May, M. Robb

The requirement that Father admit molesting child to complete sex offender treatment violates Father’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination; the trial court’s reliance on his refusal to so admit as proof that his parental rights should be terminated violates his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process.

Linares v. El Tacarajo, No. 18A-CT-276, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 8, 2019).

February 11, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch, M. Robb

Using the Goodwin foreseeability analysis, an automobile salvage business did not have a duty to a patron of a mobile food truck serving food in its parking lot that exploded and caused injury to the patron.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • 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