The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the denial of summary judgment in favor of a physician and a medical group on a patient’s claim of malpractice after the patient learned his allergic reactions were caused by the disinfectant used by the doctor. The judges held the doctrine of continuing wrong does not apply in this case.
Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller has asked a Marion County Court to appoint an attorney as receiver of an Indianapolis-based nonprofit that suspended operations in June due to financial insolvency.
The city of Indianapolis does not have to pay nearly $3 million in damages to residents who paid in full their share of the costs of sewer improvements. A couple sued after discovering the city had changed its financing plan and forgave future payments by those who still owed the city.
The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that two sections of the state’s right-to-work law do not violate the Indiana Constitution. A union had asked a Lake County judge to declare the entire statute unconstitutional.
The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that two sections of the state’s right-to-work law do not violate the Indiana Constitution. A Lake County judge declared the challenged statutory provisions unconstitutional in a July 2013 ruling.
The Indiana Court of Appeals, after clarifying a point in their original opinion, still did not believe that a police detective tried to mislead a judge in order to obtain a search warrant. The judges upheld their original decision that affirmed the denial of a man’s motion to suppress evidence collected at his home following drug deals.
An insurance company, based on the terms of its policy, is required to cover storm damage to the home of a northern Indiana couple, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed Wednesday. The insurer argued deteriorated shingles were the cause of the water damage in the home.
A Marion Superior Court did not err when it decided that the location of an accident involving a drowsy driver – South Dakota – should be the applicable law in a case brought in Indiana.
Allowing a child services supervisor’s hearsay testimony about a father’s fitness to retain his parental rights was, at most, a harmless error, the Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled.
Noting a pending discovery may still turn up answers, the Indiana Court of Appeals overturned a summary judgment and allowed a feud between former business partners to continue.
A man who says he is suffering negative repercussions after a mental health facility released his medical information to a family member will be able to move forward with his case in court.
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of an agent and an insurance company after the owner of a pub sued them believing they owed a duty to advise that the policy the pub chose would be insufficient to cover the replacement cost of the building.
The trial court did not err in denying an attorney’s motion to dismiss a legal malpractice claim brought against him by Clark County’s Board of Commissioners and Aviation Board, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
Tackling an issue of first impression involving a request for payment of post-secondary education expenses, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that a child support order under I.C. 31-16-6-6 refers to the parties’ most recent order concerning support.
Because a man who was sent to the Department of Correction after his community corrections placement was revoked has been released from prison, his appeal is moot, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
Finding an auto dealer untimely appealed the denial of his motion to correct error regarding a judgment in favor of a buyer, the Indiana Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.
Citing lack of evidence, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed an Indianapolis teen’s adjudication as a juvenile delinquent for committing what would be Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement if committed by an adult. None of his actions suggested any criminal activity was afoot.
The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief for a man who charged his attorney was ineffective for not doing a better job arguing the sufficiency of the evidence to prove the defendant conspired to commit dealing cocaine.
Clearing up confusion among the courts as to whether a jury instruction regarding the definition of “intentionally” can include that the defendant intended to “cause the result” of his conduct, the Indiana Supreme Court affirmed Pattern Jury Instruction 9.05 represents a correct statement of the law.
Finding genuine issues of material fact exist in a negligence lawsuit as to the general contractor’s role in a subcontractor’s injury, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment and ordered further proceedings.