• 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

N. Vaidik

Gulzar v. State, No. 20A03-1202-PC-88, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2012).

August 9, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Even assuming, had he been advised of deportation consequences, that defendant would not have pled guilty due to the “special circumstances” that deportation would have uprooted his family, the very strong evidence of his guilt made harmless counsel’s failure to advise him that his theft plea bargain would result in automatic deportation.

Mertz v. Mertz, No. 64A03-1108-DR-360, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2012).

July 26, 2012 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb, N. Vaidik

A trial court best determines whether under Ind. Code 31-16-12-11 the sufficiency of a plan offered by an obligor to pay arrearage is sufficient to reinstate driving privileges.

Harmon v. State, No. 20A03-1110-CR-529, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 28, 2012).

June 29, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik, P. Mathias

Evidence was insufficient to prove the weight of the manufactured methamphetamine was three grams or more, as required for A felony manufacturing.

Sexton v. Sexton, No. 34A02-1111-DR-01059, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 8, 2012).

June 14, 2012 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Public Law 111-2012 will modify the presumptive age for termination of child support, but it will not alter a child’s ability to obtain educational support except for amending the time frame in which certain children may seek educational support.

Horner v. Carter, No. 34A02-1111-DR-1029, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 13, 2012).

June 14, 2012 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

“Alternative Dispute Resolution Rule 2.11 and Indiana Evidence Rule 408 allow the introduction of mediation communications to establish traditional contract defenses.”

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 31
  • Go to page 32
  • Go to page 33
  • Go to page 34
  • Go to page 35
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 46
  • 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