 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Franklin College v. Turner, No. 03A04-0508-CV-488,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 27, 2006, Decided , February 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A college was not awarded the entire amount of attorney's fees it sought under 20 U.S.C.S. § 1091a(b)(1) in collecting a delinquent student loan; there was no indication of preemption, so the reasonableness of the fees was properly determined under Indiana law.
|
|||||
| Green v. Green, No. 52A04-0508-CV-463,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 27, 2006, Decided , February 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a trial court considered a father's petition for modification of his child's custody, after the child's mother served notice that she intended to move the child to another state, it failed to properly assess the child's best interests, as required by Ind. Code § 31-17-2-8 and, thus, abused its discretion when it denied the father's petition.
|
|||||
| In re Boggess, Case No. 67S00-0412-DI-508,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, February 27, 2006, Decided , February 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court approved agreed upon discipline of public reprimand where an attorney, who represented a client with a support arrearage, failed to tender a requested garnishment order for over a year, resulting in an additional arrearage to his client of $ 3,000; the attorney violated Ind. R. Prof. Conduct 3.2 and also violated Ind. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(d).
|
|||||
| In re Roberts, Case No. 49S00-0409-DI-414,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, February 27, 2006, Decided , February 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an attorney failed to timely notify his clients that their convictions had been affirmed, the clients lost the right to petition for transfer; consequently, the attorney violated Ind. R. Prof. Conduct 1.3, 1.4(b) and was suspended for 30 days with automatic reinstatement thereafter.
|
|||||
| Stump Home Specialties Mfg. v. Miller, No. 93A02-0509-EX-906,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, February 27, 2006, Decided , February 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where agreement was silent as to period for which permanent partial impairment (PPI) payments were made, finding that PPI period began on date of maximum medical improvement for scheduled period was proper. Statute of limitations did not start until that time expired, and application for adjustment was timely under Ind. Code § 22-3-3-27(c).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
