A new report released earlier this month by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis and Black Onyx Management found more than 1,800 heirs’ properties — land or property passed down among family members without a formal will or estate plan after the owner’s death — collectively valued at more than $258 million in Marion and Allen counties.
The Indiana Supreme Court reversed a trial court’s grant of summary judgment for a Hamilton County property owner’s easement-by-prior-use claim in a dispute with an adjacent property holder.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana has reversed judgment for a real estate developer in a dispute with a Bloomington business, finding that the developer obstructed the business’s easement during a construction project.
A Grant County couple cannot “rely on the state to bail them out” and are not entitled to compensation for damages related to the construction of a massive dam on their property, the Court of Appeals of Indiana affirmed Wednesday.
Property owners of two parcels comprising 237 acres near Lake Monroe can use an easement to access the parcels as long as they do not intensify it, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled Monday.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana has reversed the grant of a preliminary injunction to a southern Indiana property owner who claimed his neighbor was “hostile” in blocking an easement on his property.
A Gibson County property was already under a valid lease for oil and gas production and could not be leased for development to an energy company, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled Wednesday in affirming a lower court’s summary judgment decision.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana has affirmed summary judgment in favor of Lawrence County farmers in a property dispute.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana will hear oral arguments next month in a case about the scope of easement rights benefitting property near Lake Monroe in southern Indiana.
A trial court did not err in awarding summary judgment to two couples in a Porter County property dispute case, the Court of Appeals of Indiana affirmed Monday.
A group of Steuben County residents seeking to overturn default judgment in a lakefront property dispute failed in their bid to convince the Court of Appeals to allow them to intervene or to order the trial court to set aside the default judgment.
A property dispute between neighbors will continue in the Brown Circuit Court after the Court of Appeals of Indiana overturned the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ amended complaint.
A Mooresville couple requesting a land easement of necessity for easier access to their pole barn will not be granted any such relief from the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
The public will keep the right to use Indiana’s Lake Michigan shoreline for recreation as the U.S. Supreme Court won’t consider arguments from nearby property owners who claimed they also owned the beach.
Three property owners with land along northwest Indiana’s Lake Michigan shoreline have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to undo a 2018 ruling by Indiana’s high court that declared the shoreline is owned by the state for the public’s enjoyment.
An Arcadia couple in an easement dispute with a duck hunting group has secured a pair of reversals from the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
In a ruckus between neighbors started by a corner of a house and a brown shed that are both over the property line, the Court of Appeals of Indiana toppled the trial court ruling and found the homeowners had title to the disputed property through adverse possession.
A Bloomington landowner that had to build a smaller warehouse than anticipated due to longstanding utility regulations failed to prove that Duke Energy engaged in a taking of its property by enforcing the regulations, the Court of Appeals of Indiana has ruled.
A Kosciusko County couple has secured a partial reversal from a split appellate panel after disputes about their waterlogged cottage revealed genuine issues of material fact and an improper calculation of the property’s value.
A group of homeowners argued that their feud with the developer of their subdivision put an issue of first impression before the Court of Appeals of Indiana, but the appellate panel ruled it did not have to rule on the larger issue because of the “clear and unambiguous language” of the declaration governing the use of the homeowners’ properties.