ILNews

Opinions Nov. 7, 2012

November 7, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Michael Kucholick v. State of Indiana
12S02-1211-CR-630
Criminal. Justices grant transfer and order Kucholick’s sentence for Class C felony criminal recklessness and Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief revised to the advisory term of four years, all executed. Summarily affirms Court of Appeals decision in all respects. Chief Justice Dickson dissents, believing the trial court’s sentence of seven years should be affirmed.  

Indiana Court of Appeals
Dennis Larson, Rose Real Estate, Inc., and Diversified Commercial Real Estate v. Peter N. Karagan
45A04-1112-CC-656
Civil collection. Affirms summary judgment for Karagan on his breach of contract and conversion claims as well as the award of treble damages. There are no genuine issues of fact precluding summary judgment. Reverses denial of Karagan’s request for prejudgment interest and remands for a calculation of the amount of interest to which Karagan is entitled.

Fred C. Feitler, Mary Anna Feitler, and the Feitler Family Trust v. Springfield Enterprises, Inc., J. Laurie Commercial Floors, LLC, d/b/a Jack Lauries Floor Designs, JM Woodworking Co.
17A04-1206-PL-297
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment in favor of the subcontractors on the question of the Feitlers’ personal responsibility, as that issue should go to trial. Agrees that neither J. Laurie Commercial Floors nor JM Woodworking can hold a mechanic’s lien against the real estate on which Fred and Mary Anna Feitler were building a home.

Cornelius Hooten v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1204-CR-266
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Cameron Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1109-PC-502
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

John Salter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1203-CR-275
Criminal. Dismisses appeal of conviction following guilty plea.

In the Matter of C.C., (Minor Child), a Child in Need of Services; M.W., Mother v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, Child Advocates, Inc. (NFP)
49A04-1203-JC-127
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication of 17-year-old C.C. as a child in need of services.

In the Matter of the Parent-Child Rel. of: K.E.G.-H. and D.G. v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
51A01-1204-JT-174
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

LaQuinton Leonard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1203-CR-128
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for murder.

Cherie Solms v. Michael Solms (NFP)
27A02-1204-PO-279
Protective order. Reverses dismissal of petition for an order of protection against Michael Solms. Remands with instructions.

Brian Gale Waters v. Indiana Real Estate Commission, et al. (NFP)
49A02-1112-MI-1165
Miscellaneous. Reverses and remands with instructions to dismiss Waters’ complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Brandon Price v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1203-CR-154
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, reverses public defender fee and remands for further proceedings.

Vincent O. Dates v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A05-1203-CR-134
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Thomas Dudley and Barbara Dudley v. The Estate of Earl Studtmann (NFP)
46A03-1204-PL-147
Civil plenary. Reverses entry of summary judgment for the estate and remands for further proceedings.

James S. Shidler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
37A05-1204-CR-186
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class A felony conspiracy to commit murder.

Adrian Lotaki v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1106-PC-284
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Living in South Bend, I travel to Michigan a lot. Virtually every gas station sells cold beer there. Many sell the hard stuff too. Doesn't seem to be a big deal there.

  2. Mr. Ricker, how foolish of you to think that by complying with the law you would be ok. Don't you know that Indiana is a state that welcomes monopolies, and that Indiana's legislature is the one entity in this state that believes monopolistic practices (such as those engaged in by Indiana Association of Beverage Retailers) make Indiana a "business-friendly" state? How can you not see this????

  3. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  4. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  5. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

ADVERTISEMENT