A county sheriff’s department that doesn’t own, maintain or control a county road does not owe a common law duty to warn the public of known hazardous conditions upon the roadway, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted three certified questions stemming from a case in the Southern District of Indiana.
A trial court must take the same steps in a civil action as it does in a criminal action regarding the use of an interpreter in order to address due process concerns, the Indiana Court of Appeals held for the first time Tuesday.
An attorney who made significant contributions in pro bono service will receive a posthumous honor on Oct. 21.
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges will travel to northern Indiana Thursday to hear the appeal of a man convicted of attempted murder.
The Supreme Court of the United States has declined to take several Indiana cases, including a criminal appeal about whether a stun belt restraint on a defendant during trial and sentencing is prejudicial.
The 2-cent increase per page to access electronic information on the Public Access to Court Electronic Records system will take effect April 1, 2012. The Judicial Conference of the United States authorized raising the fee to 10 cents a page to cover maintenance costs as well as to enhance the system.
A trial court did not err in admitting evidence of uncharged misconduct from another incident during a defendant’s trial for robbery, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Monday. The evidence contained a letter that helped corroborate the man’s confession to the robbery.
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Commission wants the state’s highest court to find former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi committed misconduct when he made statements about two high-profile cases he handled as prosecutor.
Emphasizing its ruling only deals with determining the proper merit rate for unemployment fund contributions, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled a manufacturer did not create employers through its new subsidiaries, so it wasn’t entitled to a lower rate.
Beginning in October, three of the bankruptcy judges in the Southern District of Indiana will be relocating their courtrooms because of construction at the Birch Bayh Federal Building and United States Courthouse.
The St. Joseph County Bar Association has released the findings of its annual survey of Superior judges. The bar association conducts the survey each year even if no judges are up for retention, which is the case for 2011.
Two panels from the Indiana Court of Appeals will hear arguments at universities in southern Indiana next week.
The Indiana Supreme Court has suspended an Indianapolis attorney after finding he engaged in attorney misconduct by collecting a “clearly unreasonable and exploitive fee” from a vulnerable client.
The Indiana Court of Appeals disagrees with the state Department of Child Services that fact-finding and dispositional hearings in a child in need of services case are interchangeable. The appellate panel has ruled a Marion County father’s due process rights were denied because he didn’t receive the opportunity for a fact-finding hearing.
The Indiana Supreme Court has affirmed that a man will serve life in prison without parole for his role in the murders of seven people in Indianapolis in 2006.
The state’s intermediate appellate court has reversed a southern Indiana judge’s ruling that a boyfriend should retain visitation rights over an ex-girlfriend’s child. It ruled that the finding is contrary to law because lawmakers didn’t allow for that type of circumstance to warrant visitation.
The state is not able to prevent out-of-state entities from placing political calls to residents within Indiana because of an existing federal law, according to a federal judge’s ruling on Indiana’s auto-dialer statute.
Indiana and 25 other states have filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States asking the nation’s highest court to rule on a lawsuit involving the Affordable Care Act.
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Board of Law Examiners is cutting one controversial question from its annual bar exam application and will revise another in order to comply with a federal judge’s recent ruling.