• 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

P. Riley

Roop v. Buchanan, No. 88A01-1304-DR-171, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 27, 2013).

November 27, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

Trial court properly ordered party to pay accrued child support obligation to the now emancipated child for satisfaction of funeral expenses for the deceased father, but the trial court could not award the remainder of the child support arrearage to the emancipated children.

Asher v. Coomler , No. 49A04-1302-DR-71, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2013).

October 3, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

When the appointed special judge was unavailable, under T.R. 79(I)(2)(a), only a judge pro tempore, temporary judge, or a senior judge appointed by the special judge could preside over proceedings.

Walls v. State, No. 55A05-1211-CR-603, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 22, 2013).

August 22, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, P. Riley

Tenants had a sufficient possessory interest in their apartment doors and thresholds and the immediate adjacent areas to request, for criminal trespass purposes, that a person leave those areas and stop banging on their doors.

In Re A.H. & S.H., No. 10A01-1302-JM-93, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 21, 2013).

August 22, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, P. Riley

Department of Child Services interviewing a child as part of the initial assessment in response to a report of child abuse or neglect does not violate due process.

Toradze v. Toradze, No. 71A05-1212-DR-623, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 22, 2013).

August 22, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown, P. Riley

“Because the trial court had established a duty to support the children in a court order issued prior to July 1, 2012 and the children were younger than twenty-one years of age, Mother was entitled to file her petition for post-educational expenses based on I.C. § 31-16-6-6(a) & (c).”

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 17
  • Go to page 18
  • Go to page 19
  • Go to page 20
  • Go to page 21
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 30
  • 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