• 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

Buchanan v. Vowell, No. 49A02-0909-CV-873, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., May 12, 2010)

May 14, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, B. Barteau, N. Vaidik

Where drunk driver injured plaintiff-pedestrian while driver was speaking on her cell phone with defendant (who was following driver in another car), trial court erred in dismissing plaintiff’s complaint alleging that defendant gratuitously undertook a duty to protect plaintiff from the driver and that defendant was acting in concert with the driver.

Bond v. State, No. 71A03-0910-CR-457, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 21, 2010)

April 23, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Defendant failed to show that selection of his jury from Judicial Center list violated Sixth Amendment’s “fair cross section” requirement.

Nasser v. St. Vincents Hospital and Health Services, No. 49A02-0910-CV-955, __ N.E.2d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 14, 20010)

April 20, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Medical causation opinion of nurse serving on medical review panel was not admissible as expert opinion under Evidence Rule 702 and thus could not be used in resolving summary judgment motion.

Julie C. v. Andrew C., No. 49A05-0909-CV-523, __N.E.2D__ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 30, 2010)

April 1, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Change in visitation to seven nights every two weeks was a de facto change of custody subject to the statutes on custody modification. When considering changing a decree for joint legal custody, the court must consider the joint legal custody factors in IC 31-17-2-15 in addition to the standard factors in IC 31-17-2-8.

Runyon v. State, No. 57A04-0910-CR-575, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 11, 2010)

March 12, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

When a person convicted of nonsupport of a dependent must pay support as a condition of probation, he has the burden to prove he was unable to pay at a revocation for having failed to make the support payments.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 40
  • Go to page 41
  • Go to page 42
  • Go to page 43
  • Go to page 44
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 47
  • 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