ILNews

Opinions April 1, 2013

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Roche Diagnostics Operations, Inc. v. Marsh Supermarkets, LLC
29A02-1201-PL-4
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment in favor of Marsh Supermarkets. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding Marsh damages based on Roche’s rental obligation under the 18-year term of the sublease after Roche terminated it over a subordination non-disturbance and attornment agreement. Judge Crone dissents.

Michael L. Curtis v. State of Indiana

49A02-1203-MI-271
Miscellaneous. Grants state’s petition for rehearing but still concludes the trial court abused its discretion by denying Curtis’ motion for relief from judgment. Finds that where the underlying offense actually charged is fraud and not theft or conversion, there is no predicate for forfeiture.

Daniel G. Suber & Associates v. Edward Smith (NFP)
45A04-1205-CT-278
Civil tort. Affirms grant of Smith’s motion to enforce an equitable lien and the award of attorney fees. Denies Smith’s request for appellate attorney fees.

Edward E. Wroblewski v. Linda M. (Wroblewski) Cain (NFP)
33A01-1204-DR-170
Domestic relation. Affirms judgment issued in favor of Linda Cain resolving various petitions and motions related to the post-secondary education component of the parties’ child support obligations.

Aaron Ingle v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1206-CR-538
Criminal. Affirms convictions of three counts of Class D felony neglect of a dependent.

Rickie B. Gilliam v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1206-CR-482
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for two counts of Class A felony attempted murder and one count of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Charles Dunmore v. State of Indiana (NFP)

34A02-1209-CR-769
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony possession of cocaine and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Trivest Partnership, L.P. v. James Gagan, Fred Wittlinger, Jack Allen and Eugene Deutsch (NFP)
45A03-1205-CT-208
Civil tort. Affirms denial of Trivest Partner’s motion for attorney fees against Gagan, Wittlinger, Allen and Deutsch.

Fayette County Board of Commissioners v. Howard Price (NFP)
21A04-1208-PL-434
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of the board of commissioner’s motion for summary judgment after the court concluded that the board’s decision not to reappointment Price as director of highway operations was a quasi-judicial decision that is subject to judicial review.

Baldemar Lopez Saldana v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1203-PC-128
Post conviction. Remands with instructions to dismiss Saldana’s appeal for relief from a ruling entered against him.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: W.S.; B.B. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
34A02-1210-JT-867
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Andrew Ray Golden v. State of Indiana (NFP)
40A05-1205-CR-243
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony manufacturing methamphetamine within 1,000 feet of a public park and Class D felony unlawful possession of a hypodermic needle.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no decisions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT