• 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

T. Crone

Whitfield v. State, No. 18A-CR-2428, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 26, 2019).

July 1, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Supreme, T. Crone

When the State seeks to peremptorily strike a potential juror based partially on the juror’s demeanor and the defense raises a Batson challenge of racial discrimination, the trial court should make factual findings regarding its observations of the juror’s demeanor.

Cavanaugh’s Sports Bar & Eatery, Ltd. v. Porterfield, No. 18A-CT-1814, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 30, 2019).

May 6, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Bar failed to establish as a matter of law that it did not owe patron a duty to protect him from criminal activity in its parking lot; the altercation occurred immediately after the Saturday night/Sunday morning crowd had been herded out of the bar at closing time and the bar had a history of reported incidents that gave it reason to contemplate further such incidents in its own parking lot.

Thompson v. State, No. 18A-CR-1947, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 15, 2019).

March 18, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

A person placed on pretrial home detention earns accrued time (calculated at a day for a day) pursuant to Ind. Code 35-50-6-3.1 and a trial court has no discretion to deny it.

In re W.R.H., No. 18A-JP-1770, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 11, 2019).

March 11, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik, T. Crone

A court cannot change legal custody of a child when a parent files a notice of intent to relocate, unless a parent specifically requests a change of custody.

Buddy & Pals III, Inc. v. Falaschetti, No. 18A-CT-1811, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 18, 2019).

January 18, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Summary judgment was properly denied because the court found that the bar failed to establish as a matter of law that it did not owe patron a duty to protect him from another patron’s criminal act.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Go to page 10
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 32
  • 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 © 2025 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs