Whether someone has worn a black robe before joining an appellate court is a discussion that often surfaces whenever one of
those judiciary posts opens in either the state or federal system.
The Indiana Supreme Court tackled the state’s habitual-offender statute today in two separate rulings, finding that
an instant offense of drug dealing, coupled with a prior conviction, can qualify a defendant as a habitual offender.
Because claims for emotional distress aren’t allowed under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute, a father can’t bring
this type of derivative claim under the Medical Malpractice Act, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
In its first case since the state amended its rules last year on how judicial mandates are handled, the Indiana Supreme Court
has today issued a decision about a St. Joseph Superior judge’s mandate for the county to pay for multiple items he
considered necessary for running the local juvenile justice system.
Two Indiana Supreme Court justices objected to affirming a man’s drug sentence for possession within 1,000 feet of a
“youth program center” because the church that ran the programs wasn’t easily identifiable as regularly
running programs for kids.
A finding that a child is in need of services only establishes the status of the child and means the child is a CHINS even if one parent isn't involved in the reasons for the determination, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today
As the Indiana Supreme Court justices considered the constitutionality of the state's voter ID law this week, one jurist wondered how much the legislative process might factor into the court's analysis of whether a statute is constitutional.
Indiana Supreme Court Justice Frank Sullivan Jr. will be honored with an American Bar Association Section of Litigation's
2010 Diversity Leadership Award next month. The award honors those who have demonstrated a commitment to promoting diversity
in the legal profession.
Consecutive habitual offender enhancements are improper, whether the enhancements arise from separate trials on unrelated charges or separate trials on related charges, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled yesterday in two opinions.
The majority of Indiana Supreme Court justices ruled in a parental termination case that the evidence presented didn't clearly show a mother's rights to her son should be terminated. One justice dissented because he believes an appellate court should defer to the lower court in assessing the facts of a case.
Indiana Supreme Court Justice Frank Sullivan Jr. praised Gov. Mitch Daniels' administration's support for improved court technology during a speech Wednesday in Denver. Justice Sullivan addressed a plenary session at the National Court Technology Conference, which is sponsored by the National Center for State Courts.
An order issued by the Indiana Supreme Court today amending the state's Child Support Rules and Guidelines caused two justices to dissent in part over worries a change may alter precedent.
In a ruling from the Indiana Supreme Court on an issue of first impression, two of the state's five justices fear a new holding will have far-reaching impact not only on the forfeiture cases at issue, but also mortgage foreclosure cases impacting the commercial and industrial real estate world.
A man sentenced to die for fatally shooting a Morgan County sheriff's deputy in 2001 will remain on death row despite his appellate claims he's mentally ill and not eligible for execution.
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled that a man serving two life sentences for his 1975 murder convictions isn't eligible to seek parole under the laws in effect at the time the murders took place, but could seek clemency though the Indiana Parole Board.
Landlords must refund a security deposit and can't get money back for property damage if they don't adequately or timely notify tenants about those claims, but landlords can still recover unpaid rent and other losses, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
The Indiana Supreme Court says the state's two-decade old law on pre-recorded, autodialed calls isn't limited to those placed to consumers with commercial messages. But justices stopped short of deciding how the law applies to political messages, leaving that question for another day.