 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Bank One, No. 49A04-0511-CV-647,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 15, 2006, Decided , August 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The discovery rule did not apply to claims for conversion of a negotiable instrument under Ind. Code § 26-1-3.1-420(a); therefore, a trial court properly granted a bank summary judgment in a conversion suit since plaintiff brought suit after the three-year limitations period set forth in Ind. Code § 26-1-3.1-118(g).
|
|||||
| Hamed v. State, No. 45A05-0512-CR-700,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 15, 2006, Decided , August 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ind. Code § 35-50-3-2, which governed defendant's sentence for criminal recklessness, did not authorize extension of a no-contact order under Ind. Code § 35-33-8-3.2(a)(4) as part of an executed sentence. Thus, defendant was entitled to have an extension of a no-contact order reversed.
|
|||||
| Rice v. Allen County Plan Comm'n, No. 02A03-0510-CV-519,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 15, 2006, Decided , August 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The determination of the Allen County Plan Commission refusing to approve the applicants' development plan as to the garage was not supported by substantial evidence. There was no evidence to support the Commission's finding that the purpose of the garage was commercial.
|
|||||
| State v. Metcalf, No. 45A03-0512-PC-592,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 15, 2006, Decided , August 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in granting post-conviction relief to appellee and determined that appellee no longer had to serve a life sentence, because the Indiana Parole Board did not intend that the life sentence be discharged under Ind. Code § 11-13-3-5(a)(3) when it granted a turnover to allow appellee to serve a sentence for theft.
|
|||||
| City of Kokomo v. Kern, No. 34A04-0512-CV-726,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 17, 2006, Decided , August 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where fire department employee was demoted after making public comments critical of department after his permit for fireworks display was denied, this did not violate First Amendment. Demotion was necessary for department to operate efficiently and effectively, as comments had great potential for disruption in organization that required discipline.
|
|||||
| Eichelberger v. State, No. 49A02-0601-PC-55,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 17, 2006, Decided , August 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant's trial counsel tendered a flawed instruction on voluntary manslaughter, which improperly included sudden heat as an element of the offense rather than stating that the State had the burden of disproving its existence beyond a reasonable doubt, defendant's trial counsel was ineffective.
|
|||||
| Hollenga v. Harris, No. 79A02-0512-CV-1175, No. 79A02-0512-CV-1176,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 17, 2006, Decided , August 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred in appointing an alleged incapacitated person's neighbors as guardians of her estate because she had nominated another person for such appointment in a power of attorney, under Ind. Code § 30-5-3-4(a), whose appointment was required, as the trial court did not find the person nominated was not qualified to serve as the guardian.
|
|||||
| Kondamuri v. Kondamuri, No. 45A03-0510-CV-523,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 17, 2006, Decided , August 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Finding father was voluntarily underemployed was against logic and effect of facts, as there was no evidence flexible schedule, allowing him to spend more time with child, resulted in reduced income; rather, there was testimony other factors led to reduced income. The evidence also supported imputing income of at least $ 10 per hour to mother.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
