 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dixon v. State, No. 49A02-0612-CR-1160,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 12, 2007, Decided, July 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence to sustain defendant's invasion of privacy conviction under Ind. Code § 35-46-1-15.1(1). An officer had advised defendant that he had been served with a protective order and that he was not to return to his wife's residence; even if the wife had consented to his presence, this did not negate the elements of the crime.
|
|||||
| Phillips v. State, No. 49A05-0608-CR-432,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 12, 2007, Decided, July 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because under Ind. Code § 35-38-1-7.1, the trial court no longer had the obligation to weigh aggravating factors and mitigating factors, the court could not review its weighing of such factors. Furthermore, defendant's criminal history, which the trial court cited in its sentencing statement as an aggravating factor, was supported by the record.
|
|||||
| Mendoza v. State, No. 49A02-0609-CR-759,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 13, 2007, Decided, July 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In sentencing defendant for attempted aggravated battery and other crimes, the trial court properly found as aggravators the fact that some victims were law enforcement officers, the number of victims and crimes, and the fact that defendant stole a gun. Furthermore, Ind. Code § 35-50-2-1.3 allowed the imposition of consecutive enhanced sentences.
|
|||||
| Nagy v. Evansville-Vanderburgh Sch. Corp., No. 82A05-0609-CV-488,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 13, 2007, Decided, July 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parents were entitled to attorney fees under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1988 when they prevailed on a state constitutional claim without the merits of a federal claim being addressed. Both claims arose out of a school activity fee, and the federal claim was substantial in that it had been accepted by the trial court and by at least one appellate judge.
|
|||||
| Van Kirk v. Miller, No. 76A03-0610-CV-499,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 13, 2007, Decided, July 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a legal malpractice suit stemming from the dual representation of plaintiff and the seller of a bar, summary judgment was properly granted to defendants. Plaintiff had signed a waiver that adequately informed him that he was consenting to the dual representation, and the evidence did not support his claim that defendants had favored the seller.
|
|||||
| Wayne Twp. v. Ind. Dep't of Local Gov't Fin., No. 29A05-0611-CV-661,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 13, 2007, Decided, July 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court adhered to original ruling that trial court's summary judgment in case challenging township's county option income tax share was void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Tax Court, generally, had subject matter jurisdiction over "final determinations" of department to exclusion of courts of general jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| Wolfe v. Eagle Ridge Holding Co., LLC, No. 61A01-0610-CV-453,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 13, 2007, Decided, July 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was an accord and satisfaction under Ind. Code § 26-1-3.1-311. Defendant tendered a check that was conspicuously marked as being for full and final payment of defendant's outstanding debt to plaintiff and that was accompanied by correspondence to that effect; there was a bona fide dispute over the amount owed; and plaintiff cashed the check.
|
|||||
| Addington v. State, No. 48A02-0612-CR-1093,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 16, 2007, Decided, July 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An order in which the trial court withheld sanctions pending defendant's successful completion of drug court was not a final determination of a probation violation charge under Ind. Code § 35-38-2-3(c). Thus, when defendant's participation in the drug court was terminated, the trial court had jurisdiction to reinstate part of defendant's sentence.
|
|||||
| Laker v. State, No. 49A04-0611-CR-666,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 16, 2007, Decided, July 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence BMV mailed notification of suspension to defendant at last known address established rebuttable presumption, under Ind. Code § 9-30-10-16(b), that defendant knew of habitual traffic violator status. Trial court abused direction in ordering restitution without making inquiry into ability to pay as required by Ind. Code § 35-38-2-2.3(a)(5).
|
|||||
| Stuller v. Daniels, No. 02A05-0601-CV-22,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, July 16, 2007, Decided, July 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in finding the private corporation's agreement with state development center to operate center was Ind. Code § 5-22-6-1 purchase of professional services, as it involved operating public facility subject to Ind. Code § 5-23-5-1 public bidding statute; thus, former employee and union's injunction request should have been granted.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
