When a party raises a TR 50(A) argument in a Rule 59(J) motion to correct error, the trial court reviews the evidence as if it were considering a TR 50(A) motion raised before judgment at trial; de novo review is appropriate. When the evidence heard by the jury supports reasonable inferences that defendant was not contributorily negligent, the trial court properly did not disturb the jury verdict.
Supreme
Perry County v. Huck, No. 24S-PL-297, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 22, 2025).
Local elected officials may be designated as part-time employees, which permits the county to exclude them from group health insurance.
D.W. v. State, No. 25S-JV-190, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jul. 23, 2025).
A juvenile court has a mandatory obligation to offer a formal advisement of rights under the Advisement Statute – Ind. Code 31-37-12-5. In addition, a waiver of a juvenile’s constitutional, statutory, or otherwise afforded rights must be done through personal interrogation of the juvenile, by the court, to ensure the waiver was knowing and voluntary.
In re Commitment of M.C., No. 25S-MH-187, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 18, 2025)
The appeal of a temporary commitment order is not moot, even if the commitment has expired, unless the appellee shows that there are no collateral consequences from the commitment.
State v. B.H., No. 25S-JV-47, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 30, 2025)
Even when Ind. Code § 35-38-4-2 authorizes the State to seek an appeal, the State must still comply with the appellate rules. This includes complying with the thirty-day time limit to file a notice of appeal when, following the entry of a final judgment, a trial court rules on a timely motion to correct error.