• 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

Kesling v. Hubler Nissan, Inc., No. 49S02-1302-CT-89, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Oct. 29, 2013).

October 31, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

“An auto dealership’s advertisement of an inexpensive used car as a “Sporty Car at a Great Value Price,” is textbook puffery—not actionable as deception or fraud, because a reasonable buyer could not take it as a warranty about the car’s performance or safety characteristics. But when the dealer has inspected the car and should know it has serious problems, answering a buyer’s question about why it idled roughly by claiming that it “would just need a tune-up” may be actionable as fraud.”

In re Dixon, No. 71S00-1104-DI-196, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Oct. 8, 2013).

October 10, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Per Curiam, R. Rucker, Supreme

Adopts an objective standard for determining when a statement made by an attorney about a judicial officer violates Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.2(a), “A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge . . . .”

Clark v. State, No. 20S05-1301-CR-10, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Sept. 17, 2013).

September 27, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

Defendant’s conviction is reversed because the police search at a rental storage unit that led to his arrest violated his Fourth Amendment protections.

Schwartz v. Heeter, No. 02S03-1301-DR-18, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Sept. 26, 2013).

September 27, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

A child support agreement incorporates the version of the Child Support Guidelines in effect for each particular year’s income.

M & M Investment Group, LLC v. Ahlemeyer Farms, Inc., No. 03S04-1211-CC-645 , __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Sept. 26, 2013).

September 27, 2013 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

The county auditor is obligated to notify a mortgage holder of an impending property sale only when that mortgage holder specifically requests a notice.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 122
  • Go to page 123
  • Go to page 124
  • Go to page 125
  • Go to page 126
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 175
  • 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