 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Baxendale v. Raich, No. 64A05-0610-CV-624,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was error to modify child custody based solely on the mother's move to Minneapolis. The father had not established that the move was a substantial change or that it was not in the child's best interests; the mother had been the child's primary physical custodian, and the child would be able to continue frequent visitation with the father.
|
|||||
| Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Am. Alternative Ins. Corp., No. 12A02-0610-CV-874,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a vehicle lessee's insurer's policy and the lessee's employer's policy had "other insurance" clauses, the lessee's insurer provided sole primary coverage, under Ind. Code § 27-8-9-7, for an accident occurring when the lessee drove his car on the job because the employer's policy said it was excess as to non-owned cars, such as the lessee's.
|
|||||
| Curtis v. Butler, No. 65A01-0701-CV-45,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When some voters failed to send in corrected absentee ballots, the recount commission in considering the uncorrected ballots did not err in not considering the failure to complete a corrected ballot as evidence of voter intent under Ind. Code § 3-12-1-1. The commission could determine the voters' choices from the ballots before it.
|
|||||
| Duso v. State, No. 03A01-0605-CR-180,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After a witness invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, trial court did not err in not allowing defendant to make an offer of proof by questioning her. Defense counsel made an offer of proof by describing the testimony's expected substance, and the trial court could not have compelled the witness to answer defense questions.
|
|||||
| In re Moerlein, Supreme Court Cause Nos. 71S00-0605-DI-160, 71S00-0612-DI-527,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyer's suspension was converted to an indefinite suspension from practice pursuant to Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 23(10)(f)(4) because more than six months had passed since the lawyer was suspended due to noncooperation with the disciplinary process and the lawyer did not respond to the motion to convert the current suspension.
|
|||||
| In re Rayle, Supreme Court Cause No. 98S00-0701-DI-36,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyer was suspended in Indiana pursuant to Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 23(28)(c) because he had been suspended for disciplinary reasons by Illinois, and there was no showing of any reason why reciprocal discipline should not issue in Indiana.
|
|||||
| In re Roberts, Supreme Court Cause No. 33S00-0607-DI-260,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because more than six months had passed since an attorney was suspended due to noncooperation with the disciplinary process, and because the attorney did not respond to the Disciplinary Commission, his suspension was converted to an indefinite suspension from the practice of law pursuant to Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 23(10)(f)(4).
|
|||||
| Jones v. State, No. 71A03-0611-CR-536,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly refused to suppress defendant's statements. Defendant was not in custody when he gave statements to a polygraph examiner and to a probation officer; his statements to a detective were preceded by Miranda warnings; and the fact that defendant took a polygraph pursuant to a court order did not make his statements involuntary.
|
|||||
| Rohr v. State, No. 40S00-0508-CR-381,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the defense did not timely include two witness's names on its witness list, because the State had provided the names to the defense shortly before trial, pursuant to Ind. R. Trial P. 61, the exclusion of the witnesses was not harmless error as it substantially affected defendant's right to compulsory process under Ind. Const. art. 1, § 13.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
