ILNews

7th Circuit to hold arguments at Notre Dame Law School

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments in three Indiana cases Oct. 1 at Notre Dame Law School, including a lawsuit filed by African-American police officers and firefighters in Indianapolis who claim the promotion process is racially discriminatory.

The appeal in Kendale Adams, et al. v. Gregory Ballard, et al., 12-1874, challenges the final judgment in favor of the city of Indianapolis defendants, interim orders on summary judgment, and a motion to amend the complaint. The case comes from the Southern District of Indiana.

In United States of America v. Christopher Laraneta, 12-1302, the Circuit judges will hear the appeal of a sentence imposed in the Northern District of Indiana following Christopher Laraneta’s guilty plea on multiple child pornography charges. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison and to make restitution. The Circuit court has granted leave for an attorney for the victims to participate as an intervener in oral arguments.

In Emilio Martino v. Western & Southern Financial Group, 12-1855, out of the Northern District of Indiana, the judges will hear the appeal of summary judgment for Western & Southern Financial Group on Emilio Martino’s claim the company defamed him and discriminated and retaliated against him. Martino, a part-time Baptist pastor, claims his employment with the financial services company was improperly terminated because he refused to relinquish his position as pastor.  

The arguments will be held from 1 to 3 p.m., with a question-and-answer session with the presiding judges and case attorneys for law students to follow. A reception for the judges will be held in Eck Commons. The arguments are open to the public, but seating will be limited. A live, closed-circuit feed will also be broadcast in Room 1130 of Eck Hall of Law.

The policy of the 7th Circuit is to not release the names of the presiding judges until the day of the argument.

More information on the cases is available on Notre Dame Law School’s website.
 

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. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  2. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  3. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  4. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  5. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

ADVERTISEMENT