Where can I find information about local courts in Bartholomew County?
Local Courts Current: Bartholomew County Official County Website For local court contact information, visit the county's official website or see our directory of courts and clerks.
Where can I find a list of jury verdicts?
Available online on Westlaw (password required). This site has a free database of civil verdicts (which has some dollar amounts stripped out) as well as a fee-based service. This site may also be useful for finding publishers of jury verdicts in various U.S. jurisdictions.
How do I use the verdict&settlement analyzer?
The Verdict & Settlement Analyzer can also be directly accessed through the waffle menu (9 grid box in top Lexis Advance menu). Learn how to use this tool that "aggregates jury verdicts and settlements to help you determine the likely outcome and value of litigation."
How do I find out my local court date?
For local court contact information, visit the county's official website or see our directory of courts and clerks. Contact the local court directly with questions about jury duty, an upcoming court date, or getting a copy of a document in your case if it isn't available online. Local Rules Local Rules (Currently in Effect)
What is the Superior Court of Bartholomew County?
Superior Court I is a court of general jurisdiction. Superior Court I hears felony cases for Levels 1 through 6 violations, and some misdemeanor charges in Bartholomew County; additionally, the court hears civil torts aligning with medical malpractice, automobile accidents, and property damage.
What is the Bartholomew County Juvenile Court?
Currently Bartholomew County Juvenile Court handles cases regarding juvenile paternity, juvenile delinquency, juvenile termination of parental rights, and all cases that fall under the jurisdiction of CHINS (Children In Need of Services), which is an Indiana-based program funded by a federal initiative that is designed the Judaical process and safety for children and families involved in child abuse and neglect proceedings.
What is the case in Superior Court I?
Many cases regarding owner or guardianship are also presented in Superior Court I, such as child support, parenting time, divorce, child custody, wills, disputes, and trusts. Well-being cases are also heard, such as cases involving adult protective services and protective orders. Superior Court I also exclusively hears all mental health cases and all civil case collections exceeding the six-thousand-dollar limit of small claims.
How much can a small claims court case be worth?
Cases brought before Small Claims Court cannot exceed a total value of six thousand dollars in either monetary or other asset based claims. When dealing with civil collection matters, there is no ceiling as to the value of the claim.
Where is Magistrate Nowak from?
Magistrate Nowak was born and raised in La Porte, Indiana, where he graduated from high school in 1972. He then attended and graduated from Ball State University in 1976 with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Political Science followed by a Doctor of Jurisprudence Degree obtained in 1981 from The Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Lansing, Michigan. He was appointed as Magistrate in January of 2021 by the presiding Judge of Bartholomew Superior Court Two, Jonathan L. Rohde.
Who is Judge Rohde?
Jonathan “Jon” Rohde was elected as Judge of the Bartholomew County Superior Court 2 in 2020, and assumed office on January 1, 2021. Prior to being elected, Judge Rohde practiced law for Rohde Law Offices from 2013-2020, and during that time was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court’s office of court services and three local judges to serve as Bartholomew County’s mortgage facilitator. Prior to 2013, Judge Rohde was a managing partner at the Columbus law firm of Worton & Rohde from 2008-2012. In addition to his legal background, Jon retired from the Columbus Police Department after 20 years of service, and served six of those years as Chief of Police. Jon also previously taught various courses as an Adjunct Professor for both Indiana University and Ivy Tech.
What is the VerdictSearch Research Group?
Our trusted VerdictSearch Research Group will help you quickly receive the case-winning information you need. Our experts are skilled in how to extract the precise information needed to give you an edge over your competition.
What makes a juror sympathetic to one plaintiff?
Screening jurors is a delicate process that involves myriad factors. A trait that makes a juror sympathetic to one plaintiff may very well count against another plaintiff. One fairly consistent trait is economic background. Quite simply, wealthy jurors tend to favor defendants, while low-earning jurors tend to favor plaintiffs. Need specifics? The accompanying chart, based on cases reported to VerdictSearch in California, Florida, New York and Texas, shows that plaintiffs generally have the best chance of winning when their case is heard by jurors from areas in which the average annual per capita income is less than $20,000 (red bars on the a ...Show More
Why Look at Jury Awards?
Finding data on actual jury awards and settlements can help lawyers assess damages. This page points to some resources for this task.
Iowa-Specific Sources
Iowa information may also be found in the broader databases, but these sources are specific to Iowa.
Westlaw
To view the entire directory, select Jury Verdicts and Settlements under Content types from home Westlaw screen (after you are logged in).
Lexis
Pre-search or post-search you can select the category filter Jury Verdicts and Settlements. The Verdict & Settlement Analyzer can also be directly accessed through the waffle menu (9 grid box in top Lexis Advance menu).
Additional Sources
Library location: KF1257.Z95 D65 This source presents an alphabetical listing of injuries, from abdomen to wrongful death, and for each topic summarizes relevant cases decided, including listing the amount awarded.
Suggested Search
The following searches illustrate common methods of finding jury verdicts and settlements.
Additional Information
Information in the verdict and settlement coverage is compiled by LexisNexis ® and other reporters and is not provided directly from the courts. The information is selective and is not intended to be comprehensive.
Segments
Be careful using segments when creating searches as these documents are from different publishers and thus many not contain the same data from document to document.
Who is the plaintiff in the Oregon Social Security case?
Eugene, Oregon social security disability lawyer represent Plaintiff, Melinda Butelo, who sued Commissioner Social Security Administration seeking review of the denial of her application for SSID benefits by HHS.... More... $0 (03-30-2021 - OR)
Who was the person charged with possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement?
Portland, OR - The United States of America charged John Phillip Stirling with possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA).#N#John Philip Stirling, 66, a Canadian citizen, was sentenced to 40 months in federal prison and five years� supervised release for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine under the Maritime Drug... More... $0 (05-26-2020 - OR)
What is the settlement agreement with Chancery Staffing?
On February 18, 2020, the Division signed a settlement agreement with Chancery Staffing Solutions LLC, aka TransPerfect Staffing Solutions , a legal staffing company headquartered in New York, NY. The Division had previously filed a lawsuit in May 2019 alleging that from at least April 4, 2017 to at least July 7, 2017, the company (while operating as TransPerfect Staffing), had implemented a client directive restricting its recruitment and hiring of attorneys for a document review project to U.S. citizens only, and later, to U.S. citizens without dual citizenship. Under the settlement agreement, Chancery Staffing will pay a civil penalty of $27,000, provide back pay to victims identified during the term of the settlement agreement, and participate in Division-provided training on the anti-discrimination provision contained in 8 U.S.C. § 1324b. Chancery Staffing will also obtain supporting documentation from clients that request a citizenship status restriction when staffing a project to help ensure that any such restriction is lawful.
When did ChemArt settle?
ChemArt (Unfair Documentary Practices and Retaliation) June 2020. On June 3, 2020, IER signed a settlement agreement with ChemArt, a Rhode Island manufacturing company, resolving claims that the company discriminated against a worker during the employment eligibility verification process and then retaliated against her.
What is the settlement agreement with Adaequare?
(Adaequare) to resolve an independent investigation into whether the company engaged in citizenship or immigration status discrimination in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324b (a) (1) (B). IER’s investigation concluded that the company, which recruits workers for other entities, engaged in discrimination in the hiring or recruitment/referral for a fee processes by considering only applicants who were U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents when filling a job for a client. Under the settlement agreement, the company will pay a civil penalty to the United States, train its employees on anti-discrimination obligations, and be subject to departmental reporting requirements.
What is the settlement agreement with National Systems America?
On January 14, 2021, the Division signed a settlement agreement with National Systems America, LP (NSA) to resolve claims based on its independent investigation into whether the company engaged in discrimination based on citizenship status in the hiring and employment eligibility verification processes in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324b (a) (1) (B) and (a) (6). The company recruits employees using a foreign company as its agent, and directly hires them to perform IT work for NSA clients. IER’s investigation concluded that the company (1) engaged in a pattern or practice of recruiting and hiring only U.S. citizens or U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents for certain positions without legal justification, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324b (a) (1) (B); and (2) on numerous occasions, requested copies of Permanent Resident Cards to confirm the citizenship status and work authorization of candidates who identified themselves as lawful permanent residents during the applicant screening process, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324b (a) (6). Under the settlement agreement, the company will pay a civil penalty of $34,200 to the United States and train its employees on the requirements of the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, and be subject to departmental reporting requirements.
What was the settlement agreement with Tuscany Hotel and Casino?
On October 10, 2012, the Department of Justice issued a press release announcing a settlement agreement with Tuscany Hotel and Casino resolving a lawsuit alleging the company discriminated against certain non-U.S. citizen s during the employment eligibility verification and reverification processes by requesting those individuals to provide more or different documents or information than required under Form I-9 rules based on their citizenship status. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Tuscany agreed to pay a civil penalty of $49,000 to the government and full back pay to an economic victim. Tuscany will also receive OSC-sponsored training regarding the anti-discrimination provision of the INA, be subject to reporting and monitoring requirements, and will revise its employment eligibility verification procedures.
What is the Ikon settlement agreement?
On December 8, 2020, the Division signed a settlement agreement with Ikon Systems , LLC , resolving claims that Ikon routinely discriminated against U.S. workers (U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, recent lawful permanent residents , asylees, and refugees) by posting job advertisements specifying a preference for applicants with temporary work visas, and that Ikon failed to consider at least one U.S. citizen applicant who applied to a discriminatory advertisement. Specifically, IER’s investigation found that from at least May 8, 2019, to September 21, 2019, Ikon posted at least eight job advertisements for information technology (“IT”) positions that solicited applications from non-U.S. citizens with immigration statuses associated with certain employment-based visas and, in so doing, harmed U.S. workers by unlawfully deterring or failing to fairly consider them for hire, including the Charging Party. Under the agreement, Ikon will pay a civil penalty of $27,000 to the United States, revise its policies and procedures, train relevant employees and agents on the requirements of the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, and be subject to departmental reporting requirements during the agreement’s two-year term. Separately, Ikon will pay the $15,000 to the Charging Party.
What was the Whiz lawsuit?
On May 30, 2012, the Department of Justice settled a lawsuit against Whiz International LLC (Whiz), an information technology staffing company, resolving allegations that the company discriminated against one of its employees when it terminated her in retaliation for expressing opposition to its alleged preference for foreign nationals with temporary work visas. Under the terms of the settlement, Whiz agreed to pay $21,870 in back pay/front pay to the terminated worker, $1,000 in civil penalties to the United States Treasury, and three years of monitoring and reporting requirements. Whiz will also undergo training by the Department of Justice and has agreed not to discriminate against any employee on the basis of national origin or citizenship status.