 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re Allen, Case No. 46S00-0504-DI-160,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, March 8, 2006, Decided , March 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since more than six months had passed since an attorney was suspended from practice of law for failing to cooperate with the disciplinary process, and in light of attorney's continued failure to cooperate, court converted attorney's suspension into indefinite suspension from practice of law pursuant to Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 23(1)(f)(4).
|
|||||
| Mohamed v. State, No. 49A04-0503-CR-144,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 8, 2006, Decided , March 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction of possession of a controlled substance analog, Ind. Code § 35-48-1-9.3(a), was reversed because the active ingredient in a plant called khat which defendant possessed was not a listed controlled substance and the State failed to show that it was a controlled substance analog.
|
|||||
| City of Gary v. Mitchell, No. 45A03-0504-CV-192,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, THIRD DISTRICT, March 10, 2006, Decided , March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conclusion three city police officers were entitled to preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of city's mandatory retirement policy was error; they did not show a reasonable likelihood of success on their claims pursuant to constitutional contract clauses in U.S. Const. art. I, § 10 and Ind. Const. art. I, § 24, or on any other claims.
|
|||||
| Dew v. State, No. 49A02-0508-PC-800,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, March 10, 2006, Decided , March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel's failure to inform inmate about plea offer by State, made before second trial, constituted ineffective assistance where at leave five members of first jury did not believe inmate and inmate explored pleading guilty during first trial; thus, there was reasonable probability that, but for counsel's actions, inmate would have accepted offer.
|
|||||
| In re Cosby, Case No. 10S00-0503-DI-88,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, March 10, 2006, Decided , March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyer was suspended for nine months for misconduct which included, inter alia, bringing a frivolous administrative claim, filing suits in Kentucky without being admitted to practice there, failing to properly handle legal matters resulting in prejudice to his clients, overcharging clients, and failing to refund unearned fees.
|
|||||
| Indiana-American Water Co. v. Ind. Office of Util. Consumer Counselor, No. 93A02-0412-EX-1067,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, March 10, 2006, Decided , March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State utility regulatory commission's rate adjustment of water company's rates was proper as Ind. Code § 8-1-2-6(a) empowered it to find that some high service pumps were used and useful and that one pump was excessive, and Ind. Code § 8-1-2-48(a) allowed exclusion of operating expenses that were imprudent, such as customer information system.
|
|||||
| State v. Huber, No. 45A04-0502-CR-68,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 10, 2006, Decided , March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly discounted the State's argument that a certain time period should have been charged to defendant, as it was defendant, and not the State, who secured the first trial date and it was the State that on the eve of trial sought a continuance. Thus, defendant's charges were properly discharged under Ind. R. Crim. P. 4(C).
|
|||||
| Turner v. State, No. 79A04-0507-CR-370,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 10, 2006, Decided , March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Withdraw of guilty plea was necessary to correct a manifest injustice because, after entry of guilty plea, Indiana Supreme Court decided Litchfield, in which it was decided that officers must possess articulable suspicion that individual was engaged in illegal activity to search trash; defendant should have been given chance to challenge search.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
