• 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

R. Altice

Ind. University Health So. Ind. Physicians, Inc. v. Noel, No. 18A-CT-1299, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 7, 2018).

November 13, 2018 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

Venue statute, Ind. Code § 23-0.5-4-12, conflicts with Trial Rule 75, so the statute is void.

Tunstall v. Manning, No. 49A04-1711-CT-2572, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 20, 2018).

August 20, 2018 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker, R. Altice

Trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow Defendant to cross-examine Plaintiff’s expert witness about his disciplinary history with the Medical Licensing Board.

Hamilton v. Steak’n Shake Operations, Inc., No. 49A02-1704-CT-776,__ N.E.3d __(Ind. Ct. App., March 7, 2018).

March 12, 2018 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

Using the Goodwin/Rogers framework, when the broad type of plaintiff is a restaurant patron who has been subjected to escalating threats and taunts and the broad type of harm is injury resulting after the encounter culminated in physical violence, the defendant restaurant had a duty to take reasonable steps to provide for patron safety once the raucous behavior came to its attention.

Coulibaly v. Stevance, No. 49A02-1702-DR-235, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 25, 2017).

October 30, 2017 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

Trial court properly enforced a court’s order from the country of Mali under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) as codified in Indiana; Malian order was not the product of laws that violate fundamental human rights.

West v. State, No. 02A04-1704-CR-783__ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 28, 2017).

October 2, 2017 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

A police order to exit the home was not the same as an order to stop, and the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction for resisting law enforcement.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Go to page 10
  • Go to page 11
  • 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