Trial court failed to adhere to Indiana Post-Conviction Rule 1(6) which provides that the trial court “shall make specific findings of fact, and conclusions of law on all issues presented, whether or not a hearing is held.”
Supreme
Riddle v. Cress, No. 20S-PL-573, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 2, 2020).
A trial court will not be found to have abused its discretion in setting aside a default judgment “so long as there exists even slight evidence of excusable neglect.” Because of this deferential standard of review, the trial court’s decision to set aside default judgment was upheld.
D.P. v. State, State v. N.B., No. 20S-JV-443, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Sep. 8, 2020).
A juvenile court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to waive an alleged delinquent offender into adult criminal court if the individual is no longer a “child.”
Humphrey v. Tuck, No. 20S-CT-548, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sept. 8, 2020).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in giving the failure-to-mitigate instruction; only a scintilla of evidence is necessary to support the giving of the instruction.
Smith v. Franklin Township Community School Corp., No. 20S-CT-98, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 25, 2020).
Trial Rule 41(F) filing was improperly used to to collaterally attack the merits of the trial court’s dismissal order.