Pund v. Pund

3 Citing cases

  1. Matter of Adoption of H.S

    483 N.E.2d 777 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 35 times
    Finding trial court lacks jurisdiction to accept amendments or supplements after time limit has elapsed

    State ex rel. Young, supra. A court does not lose jurisdiction by committing prejudicial error or applying the wrong principle of law, or making an erroneous decision. The remedy is appeal. See e.g., State ex rel. Young, supra, (errors in recount proceedings); Myers, supra (failure to allege the size of a ditch as required in statutory proceedings); Cauldwell v. Curry (1883), 93 Ind. 363 (irregularities in ditch assessment proceedings); Renforth v. Fayette Memorial Hospital Assn., Inc. (1979), 178 Ind. App. 475, 383 N.E.2d 368, cert. denied, 444 U.S. 930, 100 S.Ct. 273, 62 L.Ed.2d 187 (1979) (judge failing to disqualify himself); Pund v. Pund (1976), 171 Ind. App. 347, 357 N.E.2d 257 (filing petition for change of custody in wrong county); Sims v. Sims (1957), 128 Ind. App. 408, 146 N.E.2d 111 (failure of proof of divorce residency). However, it has been held that compliance with statutory preconditions in the Uniform Child Custody Act is necessary to confer subject matter jurisdiction.

  2. Twyman v. State

    452 N.E.2d 434 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 7 times
    In Twyman, the juvenile waited eight years following his criminal court conviction before asserting the jurisdictional claim.

    Subject matter jurisdiction concerns whether or not the particular court has jurisdiction over the general class of actions to which the particular case belongs. Pund v. Pund, (1976) 171 Ind. App. 347, 357 N.E.2d 257; Brendanwood Neighborhood Association, Inc. v. Common Council, (1975) 167 Ind. App. 253, 338 N.E.2d 695, trans. denied (1976). Subject matter jurisdiction must be derived from the Constitution or a statute and cannot be conferred by the consent or agreement of the parties. Carpenter v. State, (1977) 266 Ind. 98, 360 N.E.2d 839; City of Marion v. Antrobus, (1983) Ind. App., 448 N.E.2d 325.

  3. Crowder v. State

    398 N.E.2d 1352 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980)   Cited 5 times
    Holding evidence insufficient to show driver's constructive possession of marijuana found in the pocket of his passenger when there was no evidence that driver ever had the bag in his possession, had knowledge of the presence of the bag in the pocket of his passenger, or had the ability to take it into his possession or to direct its use

    The State argues that Crowder waived the question of improper venue by not requesting a change or transfer of venue upon discovery that the smoking occurred in Vanderburgh County. The cases cited by the State in support of its contention of waiver of venue are State ex rel. Dean v. Tipton Circuit Court, (1962) 242 Ind. 642, 181 N.E.2d 230; and Pund v. Pund, (1976) Ind. App., 357 N.E.2d 257. However, these are civil cases where there is no obligation to establish venue unless venue be questioned by appropriate motion.