Trial court properly granted TR 60(B)(8) motion because equitable considerations can constitute the exceptional circumstances required to grant the motion.
P. Mathias
Ind. Family & Social Svcs. Admin. v. Patterson, No. 18A-PL-925, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 17, 2019).
Ind. Family & Social Svcs. Administration properly determined that the garnished portion of Medicaid recipient’s income should be included when determining his portion of the cost of his care.
J.K. v. Ind. Dept. of Child Svcs., No. 18A-JT-529, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 7, 2018).
Admonishes DCS for its failure to afford litigants their due process rights and reminds the trial courts of their duty to ensure that litigants’ due process rights are not violated.
Seo v. State, No. 29A05-1710-CR-2466, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 21, 2018).
Compelling defendant to unlock her iPhone, under the threat of contempt and imprisonment, is constitutionally prohibited by the Fifth Amendment because revealing or using the passcode to do so is a testimonial act. The State must describe with reasonable particularity the information it seeks to compel defendant to produce and why.
Estate of Lewis v. Toliver, No. 41A01-1712-EU-2893, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 13, 2018).
The trial court has inherent power to reconsider its appointment of a special administrator.