ILNews

Opinions Oct. 18, 2012

October 18, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

John A. Dugan v. State of Indiana
49A05-1202-PC-50
Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for post-conviction relief. The court erred when it denied Dugan’s claim that Mills applied retroactively to his habitual offender enhancement. Remands for the court to vacate that enhancement.

Daniel Nanos v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1205-CR-238
Criminal. Reverses denial of motion for jail time credit and remands so that Nanos is granted an additional six days of credit against all of his sentences.

Professional Veterinary Products, Ltd. v. Pharmakon Long Term Care Pharmacy, Inc. f/k/a LIberty Express Scripts, Inc., Paul Elmer, and Veterinary Inventory Solutions, Inc. (NFP)
49A02-1110-CC-980
Civil collection. Affirms order limiting Elmer’s personal liability for certain purchases by Veterinary Inventory Solutions Inc. to $3,000.

http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2012/october/10181203cjb.pdf

Gohmann Asphalt & Construction, Inc. v. Five Star Painting, Inc. (NFP)
10A04-1206-CC-324
Civil collection. Reverses order reinstating a complaint filed by Five Star Painting Inc.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of A.B., Minor Child, and Her Father, S.M.B.; S.M.B. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
53A01-1204-JT-147
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Blake Clayton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1203-CR-129
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony pointing a firearm.

Bryan A.Ogle v. State of Indiana (NFP)
89A01-1202-CR-55
Criminal. Affirms Ogle was properly sentenced for both the Class B felony robbery conviction and habitual offender enhancement but that the court should have ordered the sentences to run consecutively.

Logan Wininiger, Richard Roberts, et al. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, New NGC, Inc. d/b/a National Gypsum Services Company (NFP)
93A02-1203-EX-225
Agency action. Affirms review board’s finding that claimants are ineligible for unemployment compensation because they were unemployed as a result of a labor dispute.

Robert Peacher v. Dennis Davis (NFP)
48A02-1110-SC-1027
Small claim. Affirms order dismissing Peacher’s action against Davis.

State of Indiana v. Shaun L. Steele (NFP)
20A03-1111-PC-502
Post conviction. Reverses grant of Steele’s PCR petition on the issue of double enhancement, but affirms the post-conviction court in all other respects. Remands for further proceedings.
.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's an appreciable step taken by the government to curb the child abuse that are happening in the schools. Employees in the schools those are selected without background check can not be trusted. A thorough background check on the teachers or any other other new employees must be performed to choose the best and quality people. Those who are already employed in the past should also be checked for best precaution. The future of kids can be saved through this simple process. However, the checking process should be conducted by the help of a trusted background checking agency(https://www.affordablebackgroundchecks.com/).

  2. Almost everything connects to internet these days. From your computers and Smartphones to wearable gadgets and smart refrigerators in your home, everything is linked to the Internet. Although this convenience empowers usto access our personal devices from anywhere in the world such as an IP camera, it also deprives control of our online privacy. Cyber criminals, hackers, spies and everyone else has realized that we don’t have complete control on who can access our personal data. We have to take steps to to protect it like keeping Senseless password. Dont leave privacy unprotected. Check out this article for more ways: https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-privacy-in-the-age-of-internet-of-things/

  3. You need to look into Celadon not paying sign on bonuses. We call get the run

  4. My parents took advantage of the fact that I was homeless in 2012 and went to court and got Legal Guardianship I my 2 daughters. I am finally back on my feet and want them back, but now they want to fight me on it. I want to raise my children and have them almost all the time on the weekends. Mynparents are both almost 70 years old and they play favorites which bothers me a lot. Do I have a leg to stand on if I go to court to terminate lehal guardianship? My kids want to live with me and I want to raise them, this was supposed to be temporary, and now it is turning into a fight. Ridiculous

  5. Here's my two cents. While in Texas in 2007 I was not registered because I only had to do it for ten years. So imagine my surprise as I find myself forced to register in Texas because indiana can't get their head out of their butt long enough to realize they passed an ex post facto law in 2006. So because Indiana had me listed as a failure to register Texas said I had to do it there. Now if Indiana had done right by me all along I wouldn't need the aclu to defend my rights. But such is life.

ADVERTISEMENT