• 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

D.W. v. State, No. 25S-JV-190, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jul. 23, 2025).

July 28, 2025 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: M. Massa, Supreme

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)

July 21, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Per Curiam, Supreme

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)

July 7, 2025 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

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.

In re Civil Commitment of J.W., No. 25S-MH-153, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 24, 2025).

June 30, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Per Curiam, Supreme

Outpatient treatment is a viable option for involuntary commitments when such programs are likely to be a safe and beneficial alternative to inpatient treatment.

South Bend Comm. School Corp. v. Grabowski, No. 24S-CT-395, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 24, 2025).

June 30, 2025 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, G. Slaughter, Supreme

A Frampton claim, an exception to Indiana’s employment-at-will doctrine. requires the claimant to prove that her employer actually or constructively discharged her solely to deter her from seeking workers’ compensation benefits.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 174
  • 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