 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dugan v. State, No. 49A02-0604-CR-302,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Using the language that defined the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm by serious violent felon with which defendant was charged did not require bifurcation as, inter alia, the trial court ordered that the State limits its use of the "serious violent felon" language, even during voir dire, in order to offset any prejudice to defendant.
|
|||||
| McGuire v. Century Sur. Co., No. 55A01-0604-CV-161,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When insureds, defendants in a foreclosure action, brought a third-party complaint against an insurer after their claim was denied, the insureds' bankruptcy filing did not stay the third-party proceedings. 11 U.S.C.S. § 362 did not apply to third-party complaints brought by a debtor on claims not directly related to a creditor's initial complaint.
|
|||||
| Lang v. Starke County Office of Family & Children, No. 75A03-0607-JV-287,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 14, 2007, Decided , February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of father's parental rights under Ind. Code § 31-35-2-4(b)(2) was upheld where, inter alia, father had a history of using unreasonable corporal punishment and failed to differentiate reasonable and unreasonable corporal punishment, failed or refused to complete requirements and services of case plans, and the children feared the father.
|
|||||
| Kimrey v. Donahue, No. 48A02-0603-CV-261,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 15, 2007, Decided , February 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Complaint filed by the inmates alleging that an administrative procedure violated their rights under Ind. Code Ann. § 11-11-3-6 was dismissed because nothing in § 11-11-3-6 suggested that the inmates had a right to enforce the "rights" conferred thereby in the court; inmates had to enforce rights through the prison system's grievance procedure.
|
|||||
| In re Guardianship of Knepper, No. 82A04-0602-CV-57,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While grandchildren referred to Ind. Code § 29-3-8-5 in their proposed findings, their trial theories did not support its applicability, and a guardian was not given an opportunity to respond to the findings; the original holding that the grandchildren waived the issue and that the guardian was properly granted a judgment was reaffirmed.
|
|||||
| P.M. v. State, No. 49A02-0605-JV-00434,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 16, 2007, Decided , February 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Juvenile court did not err in admitting into evidence incriminating statements which juvenile claimed were obtained in violation of his rights to be free of self-incrimination under Fifth Amendment and Ind. Const. art. I, § 14; statements made were in response to a single question by a curious private party who was not acting on behalf of police.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Harris, No. 46A03-0607-CV-305,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 16, 2007, Decided , February 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an inmate did not diligently try to obtain an attorney, as required by Ind. Code Ann. §§ 34-10-1-2(d)(1), 34-58-2-1 (2006), and because the inmate did not show excusable neglect or a condition beyond his control for failing prosecute his case for almost seven months, the inmate's action was properly dismissed under Ind. R. Trial P. 41(E).
|
|||||
| Williams v. State, No. 49A04-0603-CR-110,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 16, 2007, Decided , February 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Maximum sentence for conviction of torturing a vertebrate animal, Ind. Code § 35-46-3-12, was proper. Defendant held his girlfriend's dog, who was trying to protect the girlfriend during an argument she had with defendant, by the collar and stabbed it to death. Defendant then tossed the dog's carcass into the yard toward approaching officers.
|
|||||
| Querrey & Harrow, Ltd. v. Transcon. Ins. Co., No. 45A03-0601-CV-36,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, February 19, 2007, Decided , February 19, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in denying summary judgment to law firms and attorneys as to an excess insurance company's legal malpractice action, because Indiana law dictated that a legal malpractice claim could not be assigned, and there was no evidence that the company was a client in the underlying personal injury action against an insured.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
