 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Borum v. Owens, No. 48A02-0511-CV-1122,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 21, 2006, Decided , August 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the child had been emancipated and had married a man who made approximately the same amount as the child's father, the father demonstrated a change of circumstances under Ind. Code § 31-16-8-1(1) justifying termination of his obligation to pay almost all of the child's college expenses.
|
|||||
| Pinkowski v. Calumet Twp., No. 45A04-0601-CV-13,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 21, 2006, Decided , August 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Specific performance of a township's option to purchase real property from lessors was properly ordered because the township trustee had the implied power to exercise the option under Ind. Code § 36-6-4-3(5). The township unequivocally exercised its option and properly followed procedures in the parties' agreement to cure an alleged rent arrearage.
|
|||||
| State v. Williamson, No. 87A05-0508-CR-475,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 21, 2006, Decided , August 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting defendant's motion to suppress evidence in her trial on charges of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, as an excise officer did not place defendant under arrest, so the requirements of being in uniform or driving a marked vehicle placed on officers by Ind. Code § 9-30-2-2 vehicle did not apply.
|
|||||
| Geiger & Peters, Inc. v. Berghoff, No. 49A02-0509-CV-832,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 22, 2006, Decided , August 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A corporate creditor could not sue, as creditor or a bank's assignee, for a corporation, under Ind. Code § 23-1-32-1, as they did not represent shareholders, nor could it hold an officer personally liable. The officer and a competitor were not liable for interference with a business relationship, as they did not illegally divert corporate business.
|
|||||
| Harbours Condo. Ass'n v. Hudson, No. 10A01-0509-CV-435,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, August 22, 2006, Decided , August 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a condominium owner had paid both the late fees and the delinquent assessments owed to an association, the association was in the same position as it would have been had the trial court entered a decree of foreclosure of the lien for the assessments, and any error in denying the foreclosure was harmless pursuant to Ind. R. Trial P. 61.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
