Legal Opinion

Buckalew v. Buckalew

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided September 7, 2001No. 34S05-0107-CV-332PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDickson, Justice

Concluding that a local court rule requiring the filing of an income and property disclosure form was jurisdictional, the Court of Appeals held a dissolution decree was void due to the trial court's failure to follow its own rule. Buckalew v. Buckalew, 744 N.E.2d 504 (Ind.Ct.App.2001). Having previously granted transfer, we hold that the local rule was not jurisdictional, and we reject the claim that noncompliance with the local rule requires the dissolution decree to be vacated.

The parties do not dispute that at all times relevant to this case, Howard County Local Civil Rule 16(B) required…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mishler v. County of ElkhartIndiana Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Pivarnik v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Meredith v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SteadmanKentucky Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Daugherty v. TELEKKentucky Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Indiana State Board of Health Facility Administrators v. WernerIndiana Court of Appeals · 2006
  4. B.R. v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2005
  5. M.B. v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API