 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Fields v. Conforti, No. 32A05-0603-CV-134,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 14, 2007, Decided, June 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sublessees who held over did not owe back rent to a landlord because in the absence of an express agreement to the contrary, a landlord had no right of action against a sublessee. The tenant, however, owed back rent, as it was his responsibility to see that the sublessees timely vacated the property.
|
|||||
| Hatke v. Fiddler, No. 23A05-0611-CV-662,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 14, 2007, Decided, June 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Claim of bank vice president involved in traffic accident with bank teller occurring while both parties were leaving sales meeting was barred by Ind. Code § 22-3-2-6 exclusivity provision because accident arose out of and occurred in course of both parties' employment with bank, such that they were both in same employ when accident occurred.
|
|||||
| Leeth v. State, No. 40A01-0610-CR-434,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 14, 2007, Decided, June 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of defendant's motion to modify the class D felony to a class A misdemeanor was error because, under Ind. Code § 35-38-1-1.5(d), once the trial court entered a conviction with an express provision to modify it and defendant completed conditions imposed, the trial court was required to convert the conviction to a class A misdemeanor.
|
|||||
| Schlotman v. Taza Cafe, No. 49A05-0608-CV-475,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 14, 2007, Decided, June 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an attack on a customer by unknown individuals was not reasonably foreseeable under the totality of the circumstances, and the restaurant did not assume a duty to protect the customer by placing a table on the sidewalk, the restaurant was entitled to summary judgment as to the negligence action.
|
|||||
| Beineke v. Chem. Waste Mgmt. of Ind., LLC, No. 02A04-0611-CV-665,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 15, 2007, Decided, June 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted summary judgment to the landfill operator on the homeowners' lawsuit alleging the landfill operator's breach of agreements labeled as "covenants" regarding operation of the landfill, as the homeowners were not able to show that their lawsuit was filed within the applicable statute of limitations.
|
|||||
| In re Rawls, Supreme Court Cause No. 49S00-0704-DI-158,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, June 15, 2007, Decided, June 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An attorney was suspended from the practice of law, pursuant to Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 23(10)(f)(3), for non-cooperation because he failed to respond to the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission's demands for a response to a grievance filed against him.
|
|||||
| Jensen v. City of New Albany, No. 22A01-0605-CV-181,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 15, 2007, Decided, June 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly entered judgment in favor of a city in an action by citizens for a declaratory judgment an injunction seeking to prevent use of property in a hospital expansion project, as a reversionary clause in a prior deed granting the land to the state for a highway project was unenforceable.
|
|||||
| Pflanz v. Foster, No. 36A01-0612-CV-548,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 19, 2007, Decided, June 19, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since, the purchasers had knowledge of liability but took no action to discover if the underground storage tanks on the property that they purchased and owned were leaking, and the exercise of reasonable diligence would have led to the discovery of the leaks more than 10 years earlier, their action was barred by Ind. Code § 34-11-1-2(a).
|
|||||
| Trietsch v. Circle Design Group, Inc., No. 49A04-0603-CV-153,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 19, 2007, Decided, June 19, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly granted a corporation and its directors summary judgment on a claim that the corporation's meeting notice did not comply with Ind. Code § 23-1-44-10 where case law limited recovery to the fair value of shares, the shareholder was aware of his dissent rights, and the corporation had corrected the defective notice.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
