 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Gillespie v. Geico Gen. Ins. Co., No. 49A02-0510-CV-925,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, April 19, 2006, Decided , April 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A driver was covered by uninsured motorist language in an insurance policy; no coverage existed when other driver or car were not identified, policy did not define term, three witnesses and driver said that other motorist who left scene was Caucasian female in white Honda, "identified" was ambiguous, and term was construed strictly against insurer.
|
|||||
| In re Geheb, Case No. 71S00-0401-DI-37,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 19, 2006, Decided , April 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an attorney falsified time sheets reflecting the number of billable hours, in violation of Ind. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(b), the clients were unwittingly overbilled and the attorney was overpaid; due to the mitigating factors, the attorney's six-month suspension was stayed upon two years of probation.
|
|||||
| In re Peters, Case No. 64S00-0505-DI-256,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Anglemyer v. State, No. 43A05-0510-CR-590,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant pled guilty to Class B felony robbery and Class C felony battery, because the trial court was permitted to impose a 16-year sentence regardless of the aggravators and mitigators, under Ind. Code § 35-38-1-7.1(d), its allegedly improper consideration of aggravating and mitigation circumstances could not result in a sentencing error.
|
|||||
| Fuchs v. Martin, No. 49S02-0602-JV-69,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a custody case, the trial court properly ordered the parties to submit to preliminary mediation as a prerequisite to seeking court resolution of their post-decree disagreements, as such an order did not require authorization from the local rules as long as it complied with the timing and other requirements of Ind. R. A.D.R. 2.2.
|
|||||
| Grinstead v. State, No. 28S01-0501-PC-16,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In defendant's trial for murder, his trial counsel's stipulation to the admission of hearsay statements made by a co-participant in exchange for the State agreeing not to call that witness was reasonable and not ineffective assistance of counsel.
|
|||||
| Ind. State Bd. of Health Facility Adm'rs v. Werner, No. 49A02-0505-CV-375,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a party seeking judicial review of an agency decision did not timely file an agency record, under Ind. Code § 4-21.5-5-13, the agency waived the issue of the trial court's jurisdiction by not timely raising it, as this did not deprive the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction, but only of jurisdiction over the case, which could be waived.
|
|||||
| Perry v. State, No. 45A03-0508-CR-356,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, THIRD DISTRICT, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was no error to let defendant belatedly appeal his sentence, under Ind. R.P. Post-Conviction Remedies 2(1), as the trial court did not tell him he could appeal his sentence, and he sought permission seven months after the law was clarified. His 70-year sentence for killing two people in children's presence, while on pretrial release, was proper.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
