ILNews

Justices deny transfer for two dozen cases

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court rejected 24 requests for transfer last week, granting transfer in just one case which already has been decided.

The court’s transfer disposition list for the week ending June 28 shows transfer was granted in Valentin Escobedo v. State of Indiana, 71S03-1306-CR-455, which was decided last week.

Of the 24 petitions denied transfer, all but two decisions were unanimous. Justices Steven David and Loretta Rush would have granted transfer in Darryl Shepherd v. State of Indiana, 49A05-1111-CR600, in which the Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon in a killing. Darryl Shepard appealed, claiming self-defense.

Justices Mark Massa and Robert Rucker would have taken Loren H. Fry v. Terry L. Schroder and Robert C. Schroder, Individually and as beneficiaries and personal representatives of the Estate of David H. Schroder, 09A02-1206-CT-474. In that case, a Court of Appeals panel affirmed a Cass Superior Court ruling and rejected Loren Fry’s interlocutory appeal of a trial court order denying his motion to stay a civil proceeding against him pending the resolution of a criminal murder charge against him in the shooting death of his neighbor, David H. Schroder.    

 


 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A sad end to a prolific gadfly. Indiana has suffered a great loss in the journalistic realm.

  2. Good riddance to this dangerous activist judge

  3. What is the one thing the Hoosier legal status quo hates more than a whistleblower? A lawyer whistleblower taking on the system man to man. That must never be rewarded, must always, always, always be punished, lest the whole rotten tree be felled.

  4. I want to post this to keep this tread alive and hope more of David's former clients might come forward. In my case, this coward of a man represented me from June 2014 for a couple of months before I fired him. I knew something was wrong when he blatantly lied about what he had advised me in my contentious and unfortunate divorce trial. His impact on the proceedings cast a very long shadow and continues to impact me after a lengthy 19 month divorce. I would join a class action suit.

  5. The dispute in LB Indiana regarding lake front property rights is typical of most beach communities along our Great Lakes. Simply put, communication to non owners when visiting the lakefront would be beneficial. The Great Lakes are designated navigational waters (including shorelines). The high-water mark signifies the area one is able to navigate. This means you can walk, run, skip, etc. along the shores. You can't however loiter, camp, sunbath in front of someones property. Informational signs may be helpful to owners and visitors. Our Great Lakes are a treasure that should be enjoyed by all. PS We should all be concerned that the Long Beach, Indiana community is on septic systems.

ADVERTISEMENT