10 results for 'judge:"Rush "'.
J. Rush finds that the trial court improperly ruled in a forfeiture claims because evidence indicates defendant's aunt was the owner of the confiscated money and that the cash was not tied to criminal activity. Meanwhile, the court failed to make findings that the aunt was lying. Reversed.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Rush, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 23S-MI-345, Categories: Evidence, Forfeiture
J. Rush finds the trial court properly ordered the ex-husband to obtain a life insurance policy to secure the ex-wife���s portion of his police pension. Though the husband challenges the court's authority, saying it did not consider the tax consequences of his future pension payments, trial courts have broad authority to order a security or other guarantee to secure division of property. The court���s evidence-based findings support the judgment. The husband waives his tax consequences challenge due to his presenting the court with only speculation.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Rush , Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 23S-DN-245, Categories: Family Law, Insurance, Property
J. Rush finds that the trial court properly declined to dismiss negligence claims contending a restaurant over-served a patron who proceeded to cause a car accident because state law does not eliminate common law liability for businesses that serve alcohol. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Rush, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 23S-CT-184, Categories: Negligence
J. Rush finds that the trial court properly held that a conservation officer with the department of natural resources had not acted criminally by charging a driver for hitting and killing the officer's family dog with her car, and thus that the state was properly required to indemnify the officer for acting in the course of his employment. The driver initially stopped after hitting the officer's dog but subsequently drove the last mile to her boyfriend's house so he could accompany her to the scene of the accident. The state contends the officer lied to law enforcement by contending the driver had not returned until the next day, but "the complaint was admitted for a limited purpose," which prevented the court from considering allegations in the complaint as proof that the officer lied. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Rush, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: 24S-MI-46, Categories: Employment, Government, Indemnification
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Rush finds that the trial court improperly ruled in privacy claims because evidence remains in dispute regarding whether plaintiff's private medical information had been disclosed to another person in a manner that such could become public knowledge. While negligence claims may also move forward, plaintiff is not entitled to recover damages for emotional distress. Reversed in part.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Rush, Filed On: September 25, 2023, Case #: 23S-CT-116, Categories: Negligence, Emotional Distress, Privacy
J. Rush finds that the trial court properly ruled in a contract action because the school's investment in a wind turbine project exceeded its authority under Indiana law, and the record indicates the contract was void. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Rush, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: 23S-CP-59, Categories: Contract