Jackson v. State, No. 20A-CR-385, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 19, 2020).

When a defendant failed to remove his hands from his pockets and sit down, there was insufficient evidence of physical efforts by the defendant to resist law enforcement and therefore the “forcibly” element of the offense of resisting law enforcement could not be satisfied.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Zartman v. Zartman, No. 18A-PL-1071, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 18, 2019).

When the content of a document is at issue in the context of a motion for summary judgment, it is for the court to decide based on the parties’ designated evidence.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Dunham v. State, No. 18A-IF-1442, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 15, 2019).

Equipment that had just been used to perform farm drainage work and was being transported back to the office was exempt from the weight limit for heavy equipment on state highways.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Liddle v. Clark, No. 49A04-1707-MI-1662, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 23, 2018).

Damages for loss of a pet are limited to fair market value; sentimental value cannot be included in the calculation.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Dill v. State, No. 59A01-1610-CR-2449, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 22, 2017).

Dealing in methamphetamine is not the same conduct as conspiracy to possess and distribute methamphetamine; State is not barred by Indiana’s double jeopardy statute from prosecution after defendant entered a guilty plea in federal court.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion