noting that trial court's interpretation of Administrative Rule 9 would be reviewed de novo
Summary of this case from Angelopoulos v. AngelopoulosNo. 49A02-0712-JV-1007.
October 21, 2008.
Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Juvenile Division, Marilyn Moores, J.
Ruth Johnson, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Jan M. Carroll, Mark J. Crandley, Barnes Thornburg LLP Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
noting that trial court's interpretation of Administrative Rule 9 would be reviewed de novo
Summary of this case from Angelopoulos v. Angelopoulosstating that a final judgment disposes of all issues as to all parties and leaves nothing for further determination
Summary of this case from Kornelik v. Mittal Steel USA, Inc.stating that a final judgment disposes of all issues as to all parties and leaves nothing for further determination
Summary of this case from Kornelik v. Mittal Steel U.S. Inc.Full title:In the Matter of T.B., a Child Alleged to be a Child in Need of Services…
Court:Court of Appeals of Indiana
Date published: Oct 21, 2008
Section 31-32-6-2 discusses proceedings before the juvenile court, not court records. See Bailey v. Indiana…
Angelopoulos v. AngelopoulosTo the extent that our review requires us to construe the language of Administrative Rule 9, we will apply a…