City of Indianapolis v. Erick Amaro-Sanchez (mem. dec.), 49A02-1510-OV-1721

City filed ordinance enforcement complaint after three dogs owned by Amaro-Sanchez escaped and allegedly attacked a child on July 21, 2015; City also filed a Bond Petition to cover impoundment and kennel fees.
At the August 5 bond hearing the City presented witnesses and exhibits and the court granted a $170 bond based on a "reasonable likelihood" standard (lower than preponderance).
A bench trial occurred on August 26; at its start the City asked the court to incorporate the bond-hearing evidence and exhibits into the trial record. Defense counsel indicated he believed the City had not met its burden based on that prior testimony but did not expressly stipulate to incorporation.
The City rested without calling witnesses at the bench trial; defendant put on testimony and the court took the matter under advisement.
On September 3 the trial court found the City failed to prove several charged violations by a preponderance and entered judgment for Amaro-Sanchez on those counts.
The City moved to correct error arguing the trial court should have considered the bond-hearing evidence; the court denied the motion, concluding the City failed to present its case at trial and the defendant had objected to incorporation. The appellate court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused its discretion by refusing to consider evidence from prior bond hearing when ruling on merits	City: court should have incorporated the bond-hearing testimony/exhibits into the bench-trial record; incorporation avoids redundancy and is permitted	Amaro-Sanchez: City bore burden at trial and did not present witnesses; defense objected to incorporation and was entitled to require City to put on its case	Court: affirmed — no abuse of discretion; preliminary bond hearing used a lower standard and defendant did not receive notice to treat prior testimony as trial proof, so incorporation was inappropriate

D & D NAPA, Inc. v. Unemployment Ins. Appeals of Ind. Dep’t of Workforce Dev., 44 N.E.3d 67 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (appellate review when appellee fails to file brief; prima facie error standard)
Fifty Six LLC v. Metro. Dev. Comm’n of Marion Cty., 38 N.E.3d 726 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (motions to correct error reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Speedway SuperAmerica, LLC v. Holmes, 885 N.E.2d 1265 (Ind. 2008) (standard for reviewing motions to correct error)
Lighty v. Lighty, 879 N.E.2d 637 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (definition of abuse of discretion)
Arms v. Arms, 803 N.E.2d 1201 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (courts may incorporate by reference earlier evidence to prevent redundancy, subject to unfair-prejudice concerns)
Sanders v. State, 782 N.E.2d 1036 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (relating to judicial notice and use of prior filings/evidence)
L.H. v. State, 878 N.E.2d 425 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (declining to incorporate preliminary hearing evidence into fact-finding hearing where procedural safeguards and admissibility differ)