Trial court could not use Trial Rule 60(B)(3) to grant relief on grounds that the defendant could have raised in a motion to correct error.
Supreme
Jennings v. Smiley, No. 24S-CT-186, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 24, 2025).
The party seeking production of a smartphone must provide some evidence of the device’s use at a time when it could have been a contributing cause of the incident litigated and must describe the data sought with reasonable particularity.
In re Adoption of P.J.W., No. 24S-AD-117, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 9, 2025).
For an adoption petition, trial courts should address a petitioner’s advanced age as to whether “the petitioner or petitioners for adoption are of sufficient ability to rear the child and furnish suitable support and education.”
Gierek v. Anonymous 1, No. 23S-CT-277, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 9, 2025).
Class certification by the trial court is a proper preliminary determination under the Medical Malpractice Act (MMA). The MMA covers all claims for medical “malpractice” and is not limited to claims involving only bodily injury or death.
Ind. Dep’t of Ins. v. Doe, No. 23S-CT-306, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 23, 2024).
Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund can challenge whether a claim falls within the Medical Malpractice Act (MMA) after a plaintiff concludes a settlement with a health care provider. A negligent-credentialing claim falls within the MMA only if the credentialed physician commits an act of medical malpractice. Claims premised on sexual assault by a physician during an authorized medical examination can fall within the MMA if the alleged misconduct stems from an inseparable part of the health care being rendered