This week’s discussion focuses on a recent Indiana appellate decision affirming a motion in liming to exclude evidence that the plaintiff in personal injury case was not wearing a seatbelt at the time of the collision. We use this platform to discuss more expansively the admission of evidence of whether an injured person was wearing a seatbelt in the context of a personal injury trial.
A discussion of the Indiana Supreme Court’s decision in YTC Dream Homes, Inc. v. DirectBuy, Inc. discussing the propriety of pro hac vice admission and also proposing an amendment I’d like to see to Indiana Appellate Rule 14(A) allowing interlocutory appeals of right for decisions denying/granting pro hac admission and for decisions granting or denying disqualification of an attorney.
What happens when a claim is dismissed on procedural grounds but the statute of limitations has run? The answer might be found in a Journey’s Account Statute. Here, we discuss the function of Indiana’ sJourney’s Account Statute through a recent Indiana Court of Appeals decision.
Although it is extremely rare, there are cases in which arguments on appeal are so tremendously devoid of merit so as to subject their advocates to sanctions for payment of opposition attorney fees for frivolity. This post discusses one of these rare cases.