 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Am. Family Ins. Co. v. Ford Motor Co., No. 49A02-0507-CV-684,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, May 30, 2006, Decided , May 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court in granting car company's motion for change of venue; second condition in Ind. R. Trial P. 75(A)(10) applied, that car company was a nonresident without a principal office in Indiana, and, thus, trial court should have honored the insurance company's choice of preferred forum and should not have ordered that the case be transferred.
|
|||||
| Chambers v. State, No. 52A04-0511-CR-634,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, May 30, 2006, Decided , May 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in finding State was entitled to an Ind. R. Crim. P. 4(D) continuance since State did not make requisite showing to obtain continuance; since the State was not entitled to a continuance and did not bring defendant to trial within 70 days after he filed speedy trial motion, he was entitled to an Ind. R. Crim. P. 4(B) discharge.
|
|||||
| In re A Transfer of Structured Settlement Payment Rights by Dunn, No. 45A05-0505-CV-255,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, May 30, 2006, Decided , May 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied an assignee's application to approve the transfer of an assignor's structured settlement payment rights, because 820 Ill. Comp. Stat. 305/21 barred the assignment of a workers' compensation award received under the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act, 820 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 305-1 et seq.
|
|||||
| In re McQueen, Case No. 73S00-0604-DI-145,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, May 30, 2006, Decided , May 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| King v. State, No. 41A01-0511-PC-498,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIRST DISTRICT, May 30, 2006, Decided , May 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in denying defendant's post-conviction relief petition; at the time that defendant committed Class A misdemeanor OWI in violation of Ind. Code § 9-30-5-2(b), that offense was a "substance offense" under Ind. Code § 35-50-2-10 and could be used as a predicate offense to support a habitual substance offender determination.
|
|||||
| Smith v. City of Hammond, No. 45A03-0509-CV-468,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, THIRD DISTRICT, May 30, 2006, Decided , May 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A bail agent and a bail agency lacked standing file suit alleging that a bond statute, Ind. Code § 35-33-8-3.2(a)(2), violated Ind. Const. art. 1, § 17, as the protected class consisted of persons who were incarcerated and required to make bail, and the only harm to the agent and agency was a possible reduction in demand for their business.
|
|||||
| Tormoehlen v. State, No. 12A02-0511-CR-1120,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, May 30, 2006, Decided , May 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant, after being charged with carrying a handgun without a valid license in violation of Ind. Code § 35-47-2-1, obtained a handgun license. He was properly convicted of the crime because under Ind. Code § 35-47-2-24(b), only presentation of a license that was valid at the time the handgun was carried would negate the crime.
|
|||||
| Henderson v. State, No. 58A01-0511-CR-520,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIRST DISTRICT, June 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant pled guilty to conspiracy to commit arson with intent to defraud, the trial court erred in ordering her to pay restitution to her insurer for the cost of its arson investigation. While the insurer incurred significant investigative expenses, there was no evidence it lost any revenue or income as required by Ind. Code § 35-50-5-3.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
