 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Coleman v. State, No. 41A01-0505-CR-196,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIRST DISTRICT, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where confidential informant was not well known to police and where informant gave vague description of defendant, officers lacked reasonable suspicion under U.S. Const. amend. IV and Ind. Const. art. I, § 11 to conduct warrantless search. Officers were unable to corroborate that defendant was person described until after they stopped him.
|
|||||
| Holder v. State, No. 87S05-0505-CR-194,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Warrantless search of defendant's home did not violate Ind. Const. art. 1, § 11 or Fourth Amendment because significant degree of fumes from known explosive and flammable chemical in residential area compelled officers to find source for sake of safety and health of nearby residents, and entry into home was based on risk of danger to child in home.
|
|||||
| N. Ind. Pub. Serv. Co. v. Bloom, No. 02S04-0505-CV-204,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in ordering employer to indemnify and defend employee's estate in negligence suit; that employer was self-insured did not make it employee's insurer under Indiana Financial Responsibility Act. But it had to indemnify and defend employee's estate if it failed to inform employee of his potential exposure for negligent operation of truck.
|
|||||
| Paniaguas v. Endor, Inc., No. 45A05-0505-CV-295,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since a relationship between a prior developer and the home owners was entirely contractual, and it was not necessarily foreseeable that the successive owner of the development would renege on its contractual obligations, the home owners could not bring a tort action against the prior developer.
|
|||||
| S.D. v. State, No. 49A04-0506-JV-354,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence that defendant, a juvenile, communicated the threat to kill the teacher and to damage the school to find that defendant committed intimidation in violation of Ind. Code § 35-45-2-1. It was reasonably probable that the threat would be brought to the threatened teacher's attention by the teacher who heard the threat.
|
|||||
| Wayne County Prop. Tax Assessment Bd. of Appeals v. United Ancient Order of Druids-Grove # 29, No. 49S10-0412-TA-504,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As Indiana Board of Tax Review's invoice was insufficient to provide taxpayer notice under Ind. Tax Ct. R. 3(E) 3(E) that agency record was complete, and taxpayer complied with Rule 3(E) by filing record less than 30 days after first receiving notice of its completion, tax court properly denied board's motion to dismiss appeal of a tax assessment.
|
|||||
| Ind. Dep't of Envtl. Mgmt. v. Lake County Solid Waste Mgmt. Dist., No. 45A04-0507-CV-398,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, May 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred in reversing an agency decision that had granted an applicant a permit to operate a medical waste processing facility because the trial court usurped the broad power of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to grant such permits and improperly reweighed the evidence on the issue of need of such a facility.
|
|||||
| Saulmon v. Stamper (In re C.E.N.), No. 06A04-0601-CV-71,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, May 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Ind. Code § 31-19-9-8(a)(2), parental consent was not required in regard to the paternal grandparents' adoption since there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's conclusion that the biological mother failed without justifiable cause to communicate significantly with the child when she was able to do so.
|
|||||
| Purcell v. S. Hills Invs., LLC, No. 49A05-0504-CV-191,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, May 22, 2006, Decided , May 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Common law fiduciary duties were held to apply to Indiana Limited Liability Companies (LLCs). A judgment in favor of a LLC against its manager was upheld on appeal where the record showed that the manager breached his fiduciary duties to the LLC by causing a personal loan to himself and failing to turn over sums paid by other companies to the LLC.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
