ILNews

Supreme Court grants 2 transfers

Jennifer Nelson
December 9, 2008
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to two cases, one in which the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a high school student's convictions of battery and disorderly conduct after an altercation with school officials.

In Christopher Bailey v. State of Indiana, No. 49A02-0801-CR-65, Christopher Bailey's convictions stem from an incident involving the assistant principal and dean of students. After the assistant principal told him to pull up his pants, Bailey bumped into her arm and then threw down his drink and coat, balled his fists, and cursed at the dean.

The Court of Appeals reversed, ruling the state didn't prove Bailey conducted battery because it didn't show that he committed "knowing" battery when he walked into the assistant principal's arm. The appellate court reversed his disorderly conduct conviction because Bailey's behavior wasn't considered "tumultuous conduct" that would result in serious bodily injury or substantial property damage.

The high court also granted transfer to In re: The marriage of Robert Rovai v. Ann Marie Rovai, No. 45A03-0712-CV-600, in which the Court of Appeals found the dissolution court didn't err in failing to award post-judgment interest dating from the entry of the decree of a monetary award to Robert Rovai from Ann Marie Rovai. The appellate court wrote in a footnote that it recognized its analysis of caselaw on the topic "reflects a difficulty, if not an inability, to completely reconcile the various holdings." The appellate court also affirmed the court's decision of conditioning payment of the monetary judgment to Robert on any of three occurrences - that both children become emancipated, Ann Marie voluntarily sells the marital home awarded to her, or she marries or lives with someone else in the home. The trial court also didn't err in apportioning federal and state tax refunds for three years according to the respective income of the parties for the particular year.

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. Can I get this form on line,if not where can I obtain one. I am eligible.

  2. What a fine example of the best of the Hoosier tradition! How sad that the AP has to include partisan snark in the obit for this great American patriot and adventurer.

  3. Why are all these lawyers yakking to the media about pending matters? Trial by media? What the devil happened to not making extrajudicial statements? The system is falling apart.

  4. It is a sad story indeed as this couple has been only in survival mode, NOT found guilty with Ponzi, shaken down for 5 years and pursued by prosecution that has been ignited by a civil suit with very deep pockets wrenched in their bitterness...It has been said that many of us are breaking an average of 300 federal laws a day without even knowing it. Structuring laws, & civilForfeiture laws are among the scariest that need to be restructured or repealed . These laws were initially created for drug Lords and laundering money and now reach over that line. Here you have a couple that took out their own money, not drug money, not laundering. Yes...Many upset that they lost money...but how much did they make before it all fell apart? No one ask that question? A civil suit against Williams was awarded because he has no more money to fight...they pushed for a break in order...they took all his belongings...even underwear, shoes and clothes? who does that? What allows that? Maybe if you had the picture of him purchasing a jacket at the Goodwill just to go to court the next day...his enemy may be satisfied? But not likely...bitterness is a master. For happy ending lovers, you will be happy to know they have a faith that has changed their world and a solid love that many of us can only dream about. They will spend their time in federal jail for taking their money from their account, but at the end of the day they have loyal friends, a true love and a hope of a new life in time...and none of that can be bought or taken That is the real story.

  5. Could be his email did something especially heinous, really over the top like questioning Ind S.Ct. officials or accusing JLAP of being the political correctness police.

ADVERTISEMENT