Plaintiff may raise any theories of alleged malpractice during litigation following the Medical Review Panel process if (1) the proposed complaint encompasses the theories, and (2) the evidence relating to those theories was before the Medical Review Panel.
Per Curiam
Wampler v. State, No. 14S05-1701-CR-37, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 25, 2017).
Even where a trial court has not abused its discretion in sentencing, the Indiana Constitution and Appellate Rule 7(B) authorizes revision of a sentence if it is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender.
Bess v. State, No. 09D02-1502-F5-14, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 16, 2016).
Record should be corrected to accurately reflect the facts, but this correction is not enough to provide sentencing relief.
Karp v. State, No. 15S04-1610-CR-555, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 25, 2016).
Supreme Court agreed with Court of Appeals opinion affirming defendant’s conviction and sentence but vacated language that found sentencing argument to be specious and unsupported by cogent reasoning.
Adams v. ArvinMeritor, Inc., No. 49S02-1610-PL-532, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 12, 2016).
Inmates had no private right of action to pursue wage claims against a privately owned company where they worked while inmates in the Indiana Department of Correction.