ILNews

Opinions April 15, 2013

April 15, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Friday:
Hamilton County Assessor v. Allisonville Road Development, LLC
49T10-1204-TA-30
Tax.  Affirms Indiana Board of Tax Review’s decision to reduce the assessment of former farm land purchased for redevelopment after finding a previous assessment as commercial land was in error.  The assessor claimed that the board used the wrong version of I.C. 6-1.1-4-12 when it awarded the property the “developer’s discount” for 2002, and that the board erred in determining that the cessation of farming activities was not a “change in use” under the statute.

Monday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

Jose Guzman v. State of Indiana
54A01-1209-CR-409
Criminal. Affirms eight-year sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony reckless homicide and the order Guzman pay restitution to the accident victims. The trial court acted within its discretion in ordering the restitution and in sentencing Guzman, and his sentence is not inappropriate.

Serenity Springs, et al. v. The LaPorte County Convention and Visitors Bureau
46A03-1205-MI-214
Miscellaneous. Reverses order permanently enjoining hotel-resort owner Serenity Springs from using the designation “Visit Michigan City LaPorte” and the order Serenity transfer the domain name registration to the LaPorte County Convention and Visitors Bureau. The bureau did not establish that Serenity committed trademark infringement or cybersquatting because it failed to establish that it held a valid and protectable trademark in the designation “Visit Michigan City LaPorte.” Remands with instructions to consider the bureau’s remaining claims. Denies the bureau’s request for appellate attorney fees.

John Roberts v. Stephen Buennagel and Allstate Insurance Company (NFP)
41A01-1206-CT-257
Civil tort. Affirms denial of Roberts’ motion to correct errors following a jury verdict in favor of Buennagel and Allstate on Roberts’ negligence complaint stemming from a car accident.

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

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