case of prima facie error in Indiana

2026When an appellee has not filed a brief, “we need not undertake the burden of developing an argument on the appellee’s behalf.” Id. “[W]e will reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.” Id.

2026When an appellee has not filed a brief, “we need not undertake the burden of developing an argument on the appellee’s behalf.” Id. “[W]e will reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.” Id.

2024In such cases, we need not undertake the burden of developing an argument for the appellee, and we will reverse the judgment if the appellant presents a case of prima facie error, that is “at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Trinity Homes, LLC v. Fang, 848 N.E.2d 1065, 1068 (Ind. 2006) (quoting Santana v. Santana, 708 N.E.2d 886, 887 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999)). [9] In addition, it appears that the trial court entered sua sponte findings.

2020In such cases, we need not undertake the burden of developing an argument for the appellee, and we will reverse the judgment if the appellant presents a case of prima facie error, that is “at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Trinity Homes, LLC v. Fang, 848 N.E.2d 1065, 1068 (Ind. 2006) (quoting Santana v. Santana, 708 N.E.2d 886, 887 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999)).

2025Steele-Giri v. Steele, 51 N.E.3d 119, 124 (Ind. 2016). [17] Finally, we note that Father has not filed an appellee’s brief in this matter. “[W]here, as here, the appellees do not submit a brief on appeal, the appellate court need not develop an argument for the appellees but instead will ‘reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.’” Salyer v. Washington Regular Baptist Church Cemetery, 141 N.E.3d 384 , 386 (Ind. 2020) (quoting Front Row Motors, LLC v. Jones, 5 N.E.3d 753, 758 (Ind. 2014).

2025“We will not disturb the trial court’s ruling unless the evidence leads to only one conclusion and [the court] reached an opposite conclusion.” Id. [23] Before starting our analysis, we note that Father did not file an appellee’s brief. “[W]here, as here, the appellee[] do[es] not submit a brief on appeal, the appellate court need not develop an argument for the appellee[] but instead will ‘reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.’” Salyer v. Washington Regular Baptist Church Cemetery, 141 N.E.3d 384 , 386 (Ind. 2020) (quoting Front Row

2020“Rather, we will reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.” Id. (citing Gibson v. City of Indpls., 242 Ind. 447, 448 , 179 N.E.2d 291, 292 (1962)).

2020“Rather, we will reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.” Id. (citing Gibson v. City of Indpls., 242 Ind. 447, 448 , 179 N.E.2d 291, 292 (1962)).

2017See Tisdial v. Young, 925 N.E.2d 783, 784-85 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (“We will reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant presents a case of prima facie error.”).

2015We will reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant presents a case of prima facie error, which is defined Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 62A01-1504-PO-145 | October 23, 2015 Page 5 of 11 in this context as “at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Id. at 784-85 . [13] In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support the trial court’s judgment regarding a protective order, we neither reweigh the evidence nor resolve questions of credibility.

2024Prima facie error means “at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Jenkins v. Jenkins, 17 N.E.3d 350, 352 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).

2024Prima facie error means “at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Jenkins v. Jenkins, 17 N.E.3d 350, 352 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).

2018Id.

2017Id. [6] D.S. requests that we reverse the trial court’s protective order and argues that no copies of the alleged e-mail or text messages containing vulgar and abusive language were entered into evidence, the only specific incident A.R. was able to cite as threatening was his threat to commit suicide, and A.R. provided no proof of physical violence or a threat of violence to warrant a protective order.

2018Norris v. Personal Finance, 957 N.E.2d 1002, 1006 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (citing Fifth Third Bank v. PNC Bank, 885 N.E.2d 52, 54 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)).

2018Norris v. Personal Finance, 957 N.E.2d 1002, 1006 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (citations omitted).

2018Norris v. Personal Finance, 957 N.E.2d 1002, 1006 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (citing Fifth Third Bank v. PNC Bank, 885 N.E.2d 52, 54 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)).

2015Id.

2018Prima facie error in this context is defined as, "at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). [7] Pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 60(B), "[o]n motion and upon such terms as are just," the trial court "may relieve a party ... from a judgment." Relief under this rule is "an equitable remedy within the trial court's discretion," and we accordingly "generally review a trial court's Rule 60 ruling only for abuse of discretion." In re Adoption of C.B.M. , 992 N.E.2d 687 , 691 (Ind. 2013).

2018Prima facie error in this context is defined as, “at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). [7] Pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 60(B), “[o]n motion and upon such terms as are just,” the trial court “may relieve a party . . . from a judgment.” Relief under this rule is “an equitable remedy within the trial court’s discretion,” and we accordingly “generally review a trial court’s Rule 60 ruling only for abuse of discretion.” In re Adoption of C.B.M., 992 N.E.2d 687, 691 (Ind. 2013).

2025Steele-Giri v. Steele, 51 N.E.3d 119, 124 (Ind. 2016). [17] Finally, we note that Father has not filed an appellee’s brief in this matter. “[W]here, as here, the appellees do not submit a brief on appeal, the appellate court need not develop an argument for the appellees but instead will ‘reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.’” Salyer v. Washington Regular Baptist Church Cemetery, 141 N.E.3d 384 , 386 (Ind. 2020) (quoting Front Row Motors, LLC v. Jones, 5 N.E.3d 753, 758 (Ind. 2014).

2024“Prima facie is defined as ‘at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.’” Bixler v. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-EV-3004 | July 3, 2024 Page 3 of 6 Delano, 185 N.E.3d 875 , 877-78 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022) (quoting Graziani v. D & R Constr., 39 N.E.3d 688, 690 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015)). [8] “Subject matter jurisdiction is the power of a court to hear and determine cases of a general class to which the proceedings then before the court belong.” Marriage of Thomas v. Smith, 794 N.E.2d 500, 503 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003), trans. denied.

2024“Prima facie is defined as ‘at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.’” Bixler v. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-EV-3004 | July 3, 2024 Page 3 of 6 Delano, 185 N.E.3d 875 , 877-78 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022) (quoting Graziani v. D & R Constr., 39 N.E.3d 688, 690 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015)). [8] “Subject matter jurisdiction is the power of a court to hear and determine cases of a general class to which the proceedings then before the court belong.” Marriage of Thomas v. Smith, 794 N.E.2d 500, 503 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003), trans. denied.

2020“Prima facie error in this context is defined as ‘at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.’” Id. (quoting Santana v. Santana, 708 N.E.2d 886, 887 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999)). [6] Commitment of M.M. v. Clarian Health Partners, 826 N.E.2d 90, 96 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005), trans. denied, states the following about appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence in commitment proceedings: 2 The State observed in its notice of non-participation that because J.C. was never placed in a state-operated facility, despite the language of the court order, it has no interest in this appeal; thus

2019See Neff v. State, 888 N.E.2d 1249, 1251 (Ind. 2008).

2018“We will reverse the trial court’s judgment if the appellant’s brief presents a case of prima facie error.” Zoller v. Zoller, 858 N.E.2d 124, 126 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).

2018In this context, prima facie error “is defined as[ ] at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Id.

2018“It is well settled that pro se litigants are held to the same legal standards as licensed attorneys.” Basic v. Amouri, 58 N.E.3d 980, 983 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), reh’g denied.

2018Miller v. Danz, 36 N.E.3d 455, 457 (Ind. 2015).2 Discussion and Decision [8] Annamalai argues that the trial court erred in dismissing the case sua sponte, without a hearing.3 The trial court articulated several grounds for dismissal, which we address in turn. 2 We note that when an appellee has failed to file a brief, we may reverse if the appellant presents a case of prima facie error.

2015Id. [7] An account stated “‘is an agreement between the parties that all items of an account and balance are correct, together with a promise, expressed or implied, to pay the balance.’” B.E.I., Inc. v. Newcomer Lumber & Supply Co., Inc., 745 N.E.2d 233, 236 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (quoting MHC Surgical Ctr.