Where an item searched would not have been the target of a well-regulated inventory search, and would not have been searched at all but for the criminal suspicions of the searching officer, the search is pretextual and unreasonable and an item discovered is inadmissible.
P. Mathias
Dermatology Assoc., P.C. v. White, No. 49A02-1512-PL-2189, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App, Jan. 19, 2016).
To trigger the 180-day statute of limitations extension for a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff must show that she has subsequently acquired knowledge of or received information about something she did not previously know with regard to her injury and $15,000 is insufficient to compensate her for that more serious injury.
Mathews v. State, No. 01A02-1601-CR-104, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 12, 2016).
A party seeking judicial recusal must properly bring a Criminal Rule 12 motion, and is not entitled to relief based solely on obligations under the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Yeager v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., No. 22A04-1604-MF-727, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 6, 2016).
In a mortgage foreclosure, a trial court must hold a hearing or to otherwise obtain information to determine the amount of the defendant’s provisional monthly payment.
State v. Timbs, No. 27A04-1511-MI-1976, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 20, 2016).
Forfeiture of a vehicle worth four times the amount of the maximum fine of the crime was excessive.