Skip to main content

Barnett v. State

Citations

  • 916 N.E.2d 280
  • 2009 Ind. App. LEXIS 2435
  • 2009 WL 3785749

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a small claims court has broad discretion in determining whether to admit or exclude evidence
  • noting that an offer of proof is required to preserve an error predicated upon the exclusion of a witness’s testimony
  • providing that defendant’s failure to make an offer of proof in accordance with Indiana Evidence Rule 103 resulted in waiver of defendant’s challenge to the exclusion of evidence on appeal
  • offer of proof required to preserve error in exclusion of witness testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brown, Crone

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.