• 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

Geels v. Flottemesch, et al, No. 25S-PL-225, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Apr. 8, 2026).

April 13, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, G. Slaughter, Supreme

ERISA is a preemption defense that must be raised at the trial court level or it is waived. If a fiduciary relationship is breached those actions can amount to constructive fraud which in turn supports the imposition of a constructive trust.

Martinez v. Smith, et al, No. 26S-CT-112, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Apr. 8, 2026).

April 13, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, G. Slaughter, Supreme

The common-law duty under the Reece case to refrain from creating hazardous conditions encompasses not just the paved portion of the roadway but also traffic-control devices within the public right-of-way.

Moyers v. State, No. 26S-CR-86, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Mar. 20, 2026).

March 23, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: D. Molter, G. Slaughter, L. Rush, Supreme

The Powell test applies to multiple convictions for elevated offenses that share a common base offense. Stated another way, a base offense and its elevated forms constitute a single statutory offense.

Indiana Compensation Rating Bureau and Indiana Department of Insurance v. Technology Insurance Company, No. 26S-PL-83, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Mar. 17, 2026).

March 23, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: G. Slaughter, L. Rush, Supreme

Whether the Company is entitled to relief rests on two questions: first, whether the Company had to follow the dispute-resolution provisions set out in the Assigned Risk Plan and agreements, limiting the Company’s relief in the trial court to judicial review under the Administrative Orders and Procedures Act; second, assuming the Company is limited to seeking recourse under AOPA, whether the Company properly sought judicial review.

Norris v. Norris, No. 25S-DR-226, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Mar. 12, 2026).

March 16, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

After the Court of Appeals issued its published opinion that partially reversed the trial court’s judgment, Jennifer timely sought rehearing. While that request was pending, the trial court, on its own, issued a revised order to implement the Court of Appeals’ instructions. But the trial court lacked authority to issue that order because the appellate opinion was not yet certified. We thus take this opportunity to emphasize the importance of following Appellate Rule 65(E), which prohibits trial courts, administrative agencies, and parties from taking action based on published opinions or memorandum decisions (collectively “opinions”) before they are certified.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 177
  • 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