ILNews

Opinions Nov. 13, 2012

November 13, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
D.C. v. J.A.C.
32S04-1206-DR-349
Domestic relation/modification of custody. Reverses Court of Appeals ruling that overturned a trial court modification of a custody order in favor of a child’s father. In a case involving a mother who was moving out of state, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals erred by failing to apply a highly deferential standard of review to the trial court’s determination of a custody modification based on testimony regarding the best interests of the child.

John Haegert v. University of Evansville
82S01-1204-PL-235
Civil Plenary. Affirms trial court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of the university after Haegert filed a complaint alleging defamation, tortuous breach of his employment contract and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding the university failed to meet its burden of proof.  

Indiana Court of Appeals
Kevin Perry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1204-CR-265
Criminal. Affirms conviction of robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, both Class B felonies, and escape, a Class C felony. Concludes the detective’s opinion was properly admitted as that of a skilled witness, the evidence was sufficient to support Perry’s convictions and the state’s closing argument did not create a fundamental error.

Robin R. Gordon v. Benny B. Gordon (NFP)
92A05-1205-DR-279
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s order that mother and father share joint legal custody of minor child.

Joseph Ridge v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1112-CR-1168
Criminal. Affirms conviction of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, a Class A misdemeanor. The COA found the trial court did not abuse its discretion in either denying Ridge’s request to hire an expert or in allowing Dr. Scott Kriger to hear the testimony of Hamilton County Sheriff’s Deputy Kent Mustain. The COA further concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Kriger’s expert testimony that Ridge was intoxicated on K2 at the time of the traffic stop.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT