ILNews

Opinions Feb. 1, 2013

February 1, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Eugene Devbrow v. Dr. Eke Kalu, et al.
12-2467
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Larry J. McKinney.
Civil. Reverses judgment for the defendants on prisoner Devbrow’s suit that two prison doctors and a prison nurse were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The statute of limitations for a Section 1983 deliberate-indifference claim brought to redress a medical injury doesn’t begin to run until the plaintiff knows of his injury and its cause, so his suit is timely.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Travis Koontz v. State of Indiana
29A05-1202-CR-77
Criminal. Grants rehearing to correct a misstatement of the law, but affirms original opinion that held Koontz waived any claim of an illegal sentence by entering into a plea agreement that reduced his penal exposure. Judge Baker would reverse as previously stated in his dissenting opinion.

Judy Canada v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., Bank of America, N.A., BAC GP, LLC, and BAC Home Loans Services, LP (NFP)
49A05-1203-PL-154
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of a motion to reconsider filed by Bank of America in which the trial court reaffirmed its dismissal of Count I of Canada’s class action brought as a Complaint For Fraud on the court and dismissed Count II, which contained an allegation of violations of the Indiana Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Alvino Pizano v. IDOC Commissioner Bruce Lemmons, IDOC Parole Chairman Gregory Server, CIF Superintendent Wendy Knight (NFP)
48A02-1209-MI-770
Miscellaneous. Affirms dismissal of lawsuit.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: Se.L.; N.L.; G.L.; J.L.; Sh.L.; L.L.; & I.L. (Minor Children), and D.L. (Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
48A02-1207-JT-537
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Christopher Hanneman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
67A05-1207-CR-344
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief.

Theresa Pressinell v. State of Indiana (NFP)

20A03-1206-CR-267
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of dealing in methamphetamine as Class A felonies.

Larry Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1111-CR-602
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct error.

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

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