 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Graininger v. Nat'l City Bank (In re Stonecipher), No. 49A02-0508-CV-795,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, SECOND DISTRICT, June 30, 2006, Decided , June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trustee did not abuse its discretion in denying income beneficiary's request for discretionary distribution of principal based on income beneficiary's actual needs, income of $ 141,923, and excessive gifting of up to $ 180,000 over two or three years. Home health care services expenses of $ 122,765 were excessive.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. Johnson, No. 50A03-0601-CV-39,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, THIRD DISTRICT, June 30, 2006, Decided , June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mother's Washington state child support arrearage judgment was entitled to post-judgment interest at Washington's statutory rate as, once Washington judgment was domesticated, it became enforceable in Indiana in manner provided by Indiana law. Indiana considered post-judgment interest to be "part and parcel" of money judgment.
|
|||||
| McGehee v. Elliot, No. 88A05-0509-CV-559,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, June 30, 2006, Decided , June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Property buyers' right of first refusal as to an adjoining tract of land was collateral and did not merge with the deed when the buyers purchased their tract; the language of the right of first refusal clearly indicated that it survived the conveyance of the tract to the buyers. However, the measure of damages awarded to the buyers was improper.
|
|||||
| In re Barce, Case No. 05S00-0312-DI-642,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, July 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyer, a part-time prosecutor, was reprimanded and admonished for misconduct in which he continued to represent a tenant in a dispute with a landlord despite the fact that the lawyer was aware that the prosecutor's office had sent a letter to the tenant threatening criminal charges if the tenant failed to pay a bad check tendered to landlord.
|
|||||
| In re Beck, Case No. 02S00-0212-DI-635,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, July 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyer was suspended for three years for 15 counts of misconduct wherein, among other things, he accepted money from clients to file bankruptcy petitions, failed to timely file petitions, failed to return client calls for months, and when he did communicate with clients, frequently, either he or his staff misled clients as to status of petitions.
|
|||||
| In re Stanko, Case No. 45S00-0412-DI-519,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, July 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyer was publicly reprimanded for misconduct in which he failed to inform client of adverse appellate ruling in one case, depriving his client of further review, and failed to act with reasonable diligence to inform another client about a personal injury settlement and in failing to deliver the proceeds in a prompt manner in a second case.
|
|||||
| City of Carmel v. Martin Marietta Materials, Inc., No. 29A04-0506-CV-358,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FOURTH DISTRICT, July 5, 2006, Decided , July 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As city was immune from liability under Ind. Code §§ 34-13-3-3(8) and (11) for enacting and enforcing its ordinance regulating mining activity, mining company affected by that ordinance established that it had no adequate remedy at law and would be irreparably harmed; thus, it was entitled to preliminary injunction barring enforcement of ordinance.
|
|||||
| Estate of Powers v. Powers, No. 75A03-0511-CV-537,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, THIRD DISTRICT, July 5, 2006, Decided , July 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Ind. Code § 27-1-12-14, guardian's mother could buy policies on her own life for his benefit regardless of any insurable interest, and there was no evidence the guardian, a licensed insurance agent, was wagering on her life, or that there was fraud, undue influence, or duress in their relationship; thus, he was policies' legal beneficiary.
|
|||||
| Weida v. Kegarise, No. 66S03-0508-CV-00377,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, July 5, 2006, Decided , July 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a trial court granted plaintiffs a new trial, apparently because it found the verdict to be against weight of evidence, but failed to make findings specified by Ind. R. Trial P. 59(J), appellate court erred in remanding so the trial court could make such findings, as the proper remedy under the circumstances was reinstating the jury verdict.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
