 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| ABN AMRO Mortg. Group, Inc. v. Am. Residential Servs., LLC, No. 49A02-0508-CV-817,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, April 12, 2006, Decided , April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting summary judgment to a judgment lien holder as to a strict foreclosure action filed by a mortgagee, as a developer had transferred its interest in the property prior to the entry of the lien against it, and under Ind. Code §§ 32-21-3-3 and 32-21-4-1, the lien did not attach to the property.
|
|||||
| In re Conteh, Case No. 49S00-0506-DI-301,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 12, 2006, Decided , April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: By failing to promptly notify a chiropractor of his receipt of funds in which it had an interest and by failing to hold disputed funds until the dispute was resolved, an attorney violated Ind. R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(b), (c); the attorney was publicly reprimanded for the misconduct.
|
|||||
| Moore v. State, No. 49A04-0504-CR-222,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, April 12, 2006, Decided , April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's alleged obstruction of justice, under Ind. Code § 35-44-3-4, was completed five years and three months before the State brought charges against her, so her prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations in Ind. Code § 35-41-4-2, and there was no evidence that defendant had the requisite intent to mislead a public servant.
|
|||||
| Smyth v. Carter, No. 49A04-0504-CV-235,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, April 12, 2006, Decided , April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Retention of interest by the State pursuant to Ind. Code § 32-34-1-29 of the Indiana Unclaimed Property Act after the State sold a shareholder's corporate stock that had been deemed abandoned did not constitute an unconstitutional taking of private property without just compensation.
|
|||||
| Trail v. Boys & Girls Clubs, No. 45S03-0504-CV-00132,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 12, 2006, Decided , April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Former employee's suit against employer's directors was properly dismissed, as they could be guilty of tortious interference with an at-will employment relationship only if they acted outside the scope of their official duties in evaluating his work, and he failed to allege any action on their part that went beyond their authority as directors.
|
|||||
| In re Anonymous, No. 98S00-0601-DI-17,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 13, 2006, Decided , April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an out-of-state attorney did not timely file a notice of admission pro hac vice with the clerk of the state supreme court or pay the required admission fees, the attorney violated Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 3, § 2 and Ind. R. Prof. Conduct 3.4(c); consequently, the attorney was privately reprimanded.
|
|||||
| Moyer v. Three Unnamed Physicians, No. 49A02-0504-CV-306,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, April 13, 2006, Decided , April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An emergency room visit was the discovery date for purposes of Ind. Code § 34-18-7-1(b) as it was on that date that a doctor informed the patient of a possible link between his heart disease and some acne medicine which he had taken. Since the patient filed the complaint more than 18 months after that conversation, the delay was unreasonable.
|
|||||
| Pond v. McNellis, No. 02A05-0506-CV-341,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 13, 2006, Decided , April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's summary judgment order was reversed as a former husband was entitled to the restitution of attorney's fees from the attorneys that represented his former wife in a dissolution of marriage proceeding as the attorneys were judgment creditors under Ind. Code § 31-15-10-1(b). However, the amount of attorney's fees had to be determined.
|
|||||
| R.K.H. v. Morgan County Office of Family & Children (In re Infant Girl W.), No. 55A01-0506-JV-289,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIRST DISTRICT, April 13, 2006, Decided , April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pending CHINS and termination of parental rights proceedings did not divest probate court of exclusive jurisdiction over adoption case. Nothing in Ind. Code § 31-19-2-2 limited rights of unmarried couple to petition jointly to adopt child. CHINS petition should have been dismissed under Ind. Code § 31-34-21-11, after adoption was finalized.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
