ILNews

7th Circuit to hear arguments at law school

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals travels Tuesday to hear arguments at Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis.

A panel of three judges will hear arguments in the Wynne Courtroom in three cases. In USA v. Ricky L. Fines and LeRoy F. Miller, Nos. 08-1069, 08-1089, from the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Ricky Fines and LeRoy Miller appeal their firearms convictions and sentences. Fines and Miller argue the District Court abused its discretion in admitting certain evidence and the court erred in denying their motions for judgment of acquittal. Miller also argues the District Court erred in finding he was not a "collector" of guns and not entitled to the benefit of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Section 2K2.1(b)(2).

In Jonathan S. McGlothan, M.D. v. Tracey Wallace and Eric Wallace, No. 07-4059, from the Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Dr. Jonathan McGlothan wants the 7th Circuit to reverse the jury verdict against him in a suit brought by the Wallaces following LASIK eye surgery and enter judgment as a matter of law in his favor, dismiss the matter with prejudice, and assess costs against the plaintiffs for relief the court deems proper.

In Sondra J. Hansen and William R. Hansen, individually and on behalf of C.H. v. Board of Trustees of Hamilton Southeastern School Corp. and Dimitri B. Alano, No. 08-1205, from the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Hamilton Southeastern School Corp. on the Hansens' Title IX claims. The 7th Circuit will hear arguments as to whether the District Court properly granted summary judgment to Hamilton Southeastern School Corp., whether the District Court lost jurisdiction of the Hansens' state claims after dismissal of all federal claims brought pursuant to Title IX, and whether the District Court improperly granted summary judgment to HSE on the Hansens' state law claims.

The panel of judges will be announced Tuesday. Arguments, which begin at 4:15 and are scheduled to last until 6 p.m., will be followed by a question-and-answer session. The Indianapolis Bar Association will host a reception in Conour Atrium following the arguments. The arguments and reception are open to the public.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  2. If the end result is to simply record the spoke word, then perhaps some day digital recording may eventually be the status quo. However, it is a shallow view to believe the professional court reporter's function is to simply report the spoken word and nothing else. There are many aspects to being a professional court reporter, and many aspects involved in producing a professional and accurate transcript. A properly trained professional steno court reporter has achieved a skill set in a field where the average dropout rate in court reporting schools across the nation is 80% due to the difficulty of mastering the necessary skills. To name just a few "extras" that a court reporter with proper training brings into a courtroom or a deposition suite; an understanding of legal procedure, technology specific to the legal profession, and an understanding of what is being said by the attorneys and litigants (which makes a huge difference in the quality of the transcript). As to contracting, or anti-contracting the argument is simple. The court reporter as governed by our ethical standards is to be the independent, unbiased individual in a deposition or courtroom setting. When one has entered into a contract with any party, insurance carrier, etc., then that reporter is no longer unbiased. I have been a court reporter for over 30 years and I echo Mr. Richardson's remarks that I too am here to serve.

  3. A competitive bid process is ethical and appropriate especially when dealing with government agencies and large corporations, but an ethical line is crossed when court reporters in Pittsburgh start charging exorbitant fees on opposing counsel. This fee shifting isn't just financially biased, it undermines the entire justice system, giving advantages to those that can afford litigation the most. It makes no sense.

  4. "a ttention to detail is an asset for all lawyers." Well played, Indiana Lawyer. Well played.

  5. I have a appeals hearing for the renewal of my LPN licenses and I need an attorney, the ones I have spoke to so far want the money up front and I cant afford that. I was wondering if you could help me find one that takes payments or even a pro bono one. I live in Indiana just north of Indianapolis.

ADVERTISEMENT