A Crown Point attorney has been publicly reprimanded for accusing an opposing counsel of having a sexual relationship with the police sergeant who handled an opposing client’s case.
A trial court cannot release money seized from a defendant back to the defendant for the purpose of funding his or her defense, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled. However, the forfeiture action in question will continue after the high court reversed summary judgment for the state.
A man convicted of rape and battery against his ex-girlfriend in state court has failed in his bid to win habeas relief at the federal level.
Read Indiana appellate court decisions from the most recent reporting period.
Read a summary of disciplinary decisions handed down by the Indiana Supreme Court during the first quarter of 2022.
The final oral arguments Indiana Supreme Court justices will hear this month concern whether a preliminary instruction was given in error to a jury regarding a man’s unlawful possession of a firearm.
Although the Indiana Supreme Court agreed a woman who was injured during physical therapy should be able to proceed with her complaint against her doctors, the justices split over the application of the Restatement (Second) of Torts Section 429, with one justice asserting the majority was applying a new standard that rendered Section 429 redundant.
The Indiana Supreme Court issued a reversal in a case of first impression Thursday, finding that independent physician liability extends to nonhospital facilities that provide patients with health care.
A man sentenced to life in prison after he was convicted of killing his younger brother as a teenager did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel during sentencing, Indiana Supreme Court justices concluded Wednesday.
With nearly a month of devastation unfolding in the wake of Russia’s attack and invasion on Ukraine, Hoosier leaders and judges are calling to mind a time when Indiana’s bond to Ukraine was stronger than ever.
Read Indiana appellate court decisions from the most recent reporting period.
Indiana Supreme Court justices last week could not come to an unanimous decision in declining to further consider two cases that sought transfer of jurisdiction before the high court.
The Indiana Supreme Court has determined a trial court didn’t err in its method of dividing up assets between a divorced Hendricks County couple, parting ways with the opinion of the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Indiana Supreme Court justices were divided on an issue of first impression brought by Duke Energy and the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, ultimately ruling that the utility cannot recover past coal-ash cleanup costs adjudicated under a prior rate order by treating the costs as a capitalized asset.
Like the Court of Appeals of Indiana did before the case was transferred, the Indiana Supreme Court has reversed summary judgment granted to United States Steel Corp. over a mechanic’s lien dispute regarding a now-defunct industrial project in Gary.
The final round of public interviews for a seat on the Indiana Supreme Court will be held on April 5.
The Indiana Medical Malpractice Act does not apply to claims for indemnification filed by one medical provider against another, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled. The court’s decision means a breach-of-contract claim filed against a radiology services provider can proceed, because the MMA’s statute of limitations did not preclude the claim.
A solar-power advocacy organization did not have standing to seek judicial review of a decision by the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled, dismissing the appeal outright. But while all justices agreed with the outcome, one argued the court’s standing analysis should be more robust.
Former Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill has been named a senior fellow at a Washington, D.C., think tank.
Describing an Indianapolis lawyer as “his own worst enemy” when it comes to electronic communications, a split Indiana Supreme Court has issued a public reprimand after the lawyer sent a threatening email directly to an opposing party rather than working through another lawyer. A dissenting justice, however, said the rule in question in this issue of first impression does not apply to pro se lawyers like the attorney who was disciplined.