 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brimhall v. Brewster, No. 21A01-0609-CV-416,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, April 27, 2007, Decided , April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Exceptional circumstances justifying grant of Ind. R. Trial P. 60(B)(8) motion existed where court failed to notify appellees of dismissal order following entry and, thereafter, allowed case to proceed as if dismissal had not been entered. Appellees had no knowledge or reason to file for relief until after nunc pro tunc orders were invalidated.
|
|||||
| Higgason v. Ind. Dep't of Corr., No. 46A03-0610-CV-474,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, April 27, 2007, Decided , April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of inmate's suit against department was proper pursuant to Ind. Code § 34-58-2-1 because that section did not infringe upon the fundamental right to seek redress in court and did not unreasonably deny offenders right of access to courts, but instead placed conditions on a prisoner's ability to file a claim, and was not unconstitutional.
|
|||||
| Meister v. State, No. 68A04-0604-CV-196,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, April 27, 2007, Decided , April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a truck driven by defendant's son was found to contain methamphetamine, there was sufficient evidence to support forfeiture under Ind. Code Ann. § 34-24-1-4. The son had a reputation for drug activity and a history of drug arrests; defendant had posted his bond; defendant had allowed him to drive the truck; and the son lived with or near her.
|
|||||
| Naugle v. Beech Grove City Sch., No. 49S02-0606-CV-242,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, April 27, 2007, Decided , April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Wage Payment Statute, Ind. Code § 22-2-5-1 to 22-2-5-3, applied to school corporations, as nothing in the Statute supported exempting school employees from its protection, and it did not provide for a good faith exception. Given practical considerations, the term "day" in Ind. Code § 22-2-5-1(b) referred to business days, not to calendar days.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
