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. Is it possible to amend an order for child support due to false paternity?

  2. He did not have an "unlicensed handgun" in his pocket. Firearms are not licensed in Indiana. He apparently possessed a handgun without a license to carry, but it's not the handgun that is licensed (or registered).

  3. Once again, Indiana's legislature proves how friendly it is to monopolies. This latest bill by Hershman demonstrates the lengths Indiana's representatives are willing to go to put big business's (especially utilities') interests above those of everyday working people. Maassal argues that if the technology (solar) is so good, it will be able to compete on its own. Too bad he doesn't feel the same way about the industries he represents. Instead, he wants to cut the small credit consumers get for using solar in order to "add a 'level of certainty'" to his industry. I haven't heard of or seen such a blatant money-grab by an industry since the days when our federal, state, and local governments were run by the railroad. Senator Hershman's constituents should remember this bill the next time he runs for office, and they should penalize him accordingly.

  4. From his recent appearance on WRTV to this story here, Frank is everywhere. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, although he should stop using Eric Schnauffer for his 7th Circuit briefs. They're not THAT hard.

  5. They learn our language prior to coming here. My grandparents who came over on the boat, had to learn English and become familiarize with Americas customs and culture. They are in our land now, speak ENGLISH!!

ADVERTISEMENT