Trial court properly denied motion to deem requests for admission as admitted. The purpose of Trial Rule 36 is to allow parties to stipulate matters which are not seriously in dispute, such as the authenticity of an exhibit.
P. Foley
Priest v. State, No. 22A-MI-2845, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 20, 2023).
Statements automatically generated by a machine are not hearsay. State law conditions the admissibility of breath test results on the strict compliance with rigorous Department of Toxicology unless the test is administered to the driver of a commercial vehicle cited under Ind. Code § 9-24-6.1-6. While demonstrating compliance with the Code may not be strictly necessary, it is sufficient to demonstrate that the breath test administered was reliable.
Hessler v. State, No. 22A-CR-989, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 26, 2023).
Because the new substantive double jeopardy framework established in Wadle constituted a new rule for the conduct of criminal prosecutions, it applies retroactively to cases that were not yet final at the time our Supreme Court adopted Wadle. Because Wadle replaced the common-law double jeopardy rules, the common law rule that an offense cannot be enhanced based on the same injury that established another offense for which the defendant had already been punished, is no longer applicable.
Johnson v. Housing Auth. Of South Bend, No. 22A-EV-1751, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 14, 2023).
Small claims court deprived defendant of her due process rights when it refused to hear her defenses. Parties, represented or not, must not be expected to insist on being given the protections to which they are guaranteed and should automatically receive.
Lash v. Kreigh, No. 22A-CC-1069, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 18, 2023).
The proper calculation of damages based on the theory of quantum meruit used the plaintiff’s reasonable value of the work performed.