 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Borders v. State, No. 79A02-0603-CR-180,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, September 29, 2006, Decided , September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When the trial court sentenced defendant in accordance with a plea agreement, and defendant had received a significant benefit from his plea agreement by having 7 out of 11 counts dropped, he could not complain that the sentence was illegal because it imposed consecutive habitual substance offender enhancements under Ind. Code § 35-50-2-10.
|
|||||
| Clarke v. State, No. 49A05-0508-CR-435,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, September 29, 2006, Decided , September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a consensual encounter escalated into an investigatory stop, thereby invoking the protections of the Fourth Amendment, and an officer lacked reasonable suspicion to detain defendant for investigatory purposes, the continued detention was illegal. Thus, the evidence had to be suppressed as "fruit of the poisonous tree."
|
|||||
| Gheae v. Founders Ins. Co., No. 49A02-0603-CV-236,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, September 29, 2006, Decided , September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since UM coverage was required only if the claimant otherwise qualified for liability coverage under the policy, the policy's named operator exclusion was a categorical exclusion of coverage that eliminated liability coverage, and Ind. Code § 27-7-5-2 did not require coverage of a hit and run accident, the insurer was entitled to summary judgment.
|
|||||
| In re Moores, No. 49S00-0503-DI-119,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, September 29, 2006, Decided , September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney who represented clients with conflicting interests, failed to properly explain matters so they could make informed decisions about representation, entered into unreasonable business transaction with them, and failed to expedite litigation, violated Ind. R. Prof. Conduct 1.2(a), 1.4(b), 1.7(b). 1.8(a), and 3.2 and was suspended for 30 days.
|
|||||
| McCann v. State, No. 49A05-0603-PC-157,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, September 29, 2006, Decided , September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied post-conviction relief petition on petitioner's claim that trial counsel was ineffective pursuant to Ind. Const. art. I, § 13 for not objecting to trial court's instruction on attempted murder and tendering a correct instruction; he could not show that but for failure, the result of his trial would have been different.
|
|||||
| Troutwine Estates Dev. Co., LLC v. Comsub Design & Eng'g, Inc., No. 45A05-0509-CV-562,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, September 29, 2006, Decided , September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in finding engineering company was entitled to recover damages from limited liability company and developers under quantum meruit theory; engineering company bestowed a benefit on them by providing services for which payment was expected and for which unjust enrichment would occur if benefits were retained without payment.
|
|||||
| In re Singleton, Case No. 26S00-0510-DI-491,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, October 2, 2006, Decided , October 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because more than six months had passed since an attorney was originally suspended and because the attorney did not respond to the Commission's motion to convert the current suspension, the attorney's suspension was converted to an indefinite suspension from the practice of law, pursuant to Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 23 § 10(f)(4).
|
|||||
| Methodist Hosps., Inc. v. Johnson, No. 45A05-0510-CV-593,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, October 2, 2006, Decided , October 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a medical malpractice case involving the use of an intravenous unit, trial court erred in holding that res ipsa loquitur applied. Physicians' and nurses' conduct and the medical reasons giving rise to infiltration, eschars, and second-degree burns were matters not within the realm of a layperson's knowledge and thus required expert testimony.
|
|||||
| In re Freund, Case No. 48S00-0603-DI-82,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, October 3, 2006, Decided , October 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
