• 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

Supreme

State v. Gomez, No. 25S-CR-14, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 30, 2026).

July 6, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: L. Rush, M. Massa, Supreme

Indiana Code § 1-1-2-4 is an interpretive “reference statute” that must be read together with the predicate offense statute, and that when the predicate statute uses only a general reference like “a felony,” the State need only allege a prior felony conviction (including an out-of-state felony) without proving the foreign offense is “substantially similar” to an Indiana felony.

Monroe v. State, No. 26S-CR-208, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 29, 2026).

July 6, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, Supreme

Tumulty’s bar on direct appeals from guilty pleas applies to double-jeopardy challenges to convictions entered on a guilty plea, so the defendant generally must proceed via post-conviction relief rather than a direct appeal. But a defendant may obtain direct appellate review by moving to withdraw the guilty plea as to the lesser-included offense (and asking the trial court to vacate that conviction) and then appealing the denial of that motion.

PENN Entertainment, Inc. v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue, No. 24S-TA-382, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 29, 2026).

July 6, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: D. Molter, Supreme

An apportioned tax, such as a state net income tax, that a corporation pays to one state cannot be a cost of generating taxable income for another state.

Stabosz v. Friedman, No. 26S-PL-199, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 26, 2026).

June 29, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: D. Molter, Supreme

A timely cross-appeal from a trial court’s order belatedly granting a motion to correct error is not limited to only issues raised in a motion to correct error; it may include any issues it preserved in the trial court.

Wike, et al. v. Grandview Solar Project, et. al., No. 26S-PL-192, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 24, 2026).

June 29, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, M. Massa, Supreme

Normally, challenges to a board of zoning appeals’ decision need to be brought within 30 days of the decision. But Indiana recognizes the ultra vires doctrine, which, applied here, says some board of zoning appeals’ actions might be void, meaning they are vulnerable to a lawsuit at any time, even long after the normal window for review has closed.

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 178
  • 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 © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs