|
| |
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases
for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case
for free through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more.
lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
|
| |
State Courts -
Indiana - February 6 - February 8, 2007
|
| |
Doe v. Town of Plainfield, No. 32A01-0605-CV-188,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 6, 2007, Decided , February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Plaintiff, a registered sex offender challenging the constitutionality of an ordinance, could proceed anonymously. Plaintiff was challenging government action; he had been subjected to threats and acts of violence; he had disclosed his real name to defendant's counsel; and anonymity would not interfere with the public's ability to follow the case.
|
|
| |
Hamilton v. Prewett, No. 14A01-0601-CV-32,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 6, 2007, Decided , February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The trial court properly granted summary judgment to defendant on a defamation claim. Defendant's website, which portrayed a man with a name similar to plaintiff's and in the same business as plaintiff, was clearly meant to be parody when it was read as a whole; no reasonable person could interpret the claims made there to be true.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Randles v. Ind. Patient's Comp. Fund, No. 49A02-0507-CV-683,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 6, 2007, Decided , February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a suit under Ind. Code § 34-23-2-1 for a newborn's death, it was error to consider a father's relationship with his other children. The damages, however, were not outside the scope of the evidence, including evidence that he had not paid for the mother's medical expenses, did not plan to live with her, and had not gone to the hospital with her.
|
|
| |
Taylor v. Cmty. Hosps. of Ind., Inc., No. 49A04-0605-CV-245,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 6, 2007, Decided , February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: When an employer paid an employee her paid-time-off hours 16 months after she went on medical leave, but before she was terminated, it had not violated the Wage Payment Statute. The employee had been paid in a timely fashion under the employer's policies, and as she had been paid before termination, there was no statutory violation.
|
|
| |
PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP v. Massey, No. 49A05-0512-CV-719,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Corporate directors had no standing to directly sue a corporate accountant for fiduciary breach or fraud, instead of bringing a derivative action under Ind. R. Trial P. 23.1, because their injuries related to their purchase of corporate shares while directors, and their injury was not distinct from other shareholders when the corporation failed.
|
|
| |
State v. Motley, No. 49A02-0604-CR-313,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Trial court erred in ruling jailhouse telephone calls were inadmissible as State presented sufficient foundation; officer testified, inter alia, he had prior conversations with defendant from which he could identify defendant's voice and that remarks to defendant's name and nickname led officer to believe he was listening to defendant's voice.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
State v. K.H., No. 79A05-0605-JV-231,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 8, 2007, Decided , February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Order removing juvenile from sex offender registry was proper as defendant was not informed of procedural requirements under Ind. Code § 11-8-8-5(b); trial court failed to, inter alia, hold evidentiary hearing before ordering him to register and failed to find by clear and convincing evidence defendant was likely to commit another sex offense.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|