Opinions Oct. 9, 2013

October 9, 2013
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Douglas G. Kildsig v. Warrick County Assessor
Tax. Reverses Indiana Board of Tax Review’s determination that the burden-shifting rule contained in Indiana Code 6-1.1-15-1(p) did not apply to its proceedings. The rule applies to the entire appeals process. Affirms that a portion of Douglas G. Kildsig’s land was properly classified as residential excess acreage for the 2009 tax year. The assessor presented evidence to support Kildsig did not use his land for agricultural purposes.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Specialty Foods of Indiana, Inc., d/b/a Jersey Mike's Subs v. City of South Bend and Century Center Board of Managers
Miscellaneous. Affirms order denying Specialty Foods of Indiana’s complaint for declaratory judgment as to its right to continue operating its business in the college Football Hall of Fame in South Bend under a use management and operations agreement. The force majeure provision of the agreement to be exclusive provider of food and beverages for the College Football Hall of Fame in South Bend is applicable to excuse the Century Center Board of Manager’s nonperformance of its obligations under the agreement because the closure of the Hall of Fame constitutes a “reason not within the reasonable control of Century Center.”

In Re: the Marriage of L.C. v. T.M.
Domestic relation. Reverses denial of mother’s request to modify custody. She presented sufficient evidence of changed circumstances due to participation in a travel soccer league and that modification is in the children’s best interests. Remands for an order to be entered that modifies the custody arrangement in accordance with the children’s best interests.

Custom Radio Corp., Custom Management Group, Inc., Richard Yarger and Robert O'Brien v. Actuaries & Benefit Consultants, Inc., and John M. Fogle
Civil collection. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Fogle and Actuaries & Benefit Consultants Inc. in a suit filed alleging negligent provision of consulting services and breach of oral contract. There is a genuine issue of fact as to whether the appellants’ knew or could have known that their Welfare Benefit Plans were noncompliant with federal law and that their plan contributions were retroactively taxable by April 30, 2004.

Jesse Doyle, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms denial of request to withdraw guilty plea and eight-year sentence for Class C felony incest.

Derek Dewitt v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms imposition of consecutive sentences for Class A felony attempted murder and murder convictions.

Darrell Hix v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Jeffrey Cook v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms refusal by trial court to give Cook’s proffered jury instruction on self-defense because the evidence didn’t support giving it, and affirms convictions of murder, Class B felony prisoner in possession of a dangerous device or material and class D felony criminal gang activity.

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


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This is ridiculous. Most JDs not practicing law don't know squat to justify calling themselves a lawyer. Maybe they should try visiting the inside of a courtroom before they go around calling themselves lawyers. This kind of promotional BS just increases the volume of people with JDs that are underqualified thereby dragging all the rest of us down likewise.

  2. I think it is safe to say that those Hoosier's with the most confidence in the Indiana judicial system are those Hoosier's who have never had the displeasure of dealing with the Hoosier court system.

  3. I have an open CHINS case I failed a urine screen I have since got clean completed IOP classes now in after care passed home inspection my x sister in law has my children I still don't even have unsupervised when I have been clean for over 4 months my x sister wants to keep the lids for good n has my case working with her I just discovered n have proof that at one of my hearing dcs case worker stated in court to the judge that a screen was dirty which caused me not to have unsupervised this was at the beginning two weeks after my initial screen I thought the weed could have still been in my system was upset because they were suppose to check levels n see if it was going down since this was only a few weeks after initial instead they said dirty I recently requested all of my screens from redwood because I take prescriptions that will show up n I was having my doctor look at levels to verify that matched what I was prescripted because dcs case worker accused me of abuseing when I got my screens I found out that screen I took that dcs case worker stated in court to judge that caused me to not get granted unsupervised was actually negative what can I do about this this is a serious issue saying a parent failed a screen in court to judge when they didn't please advise

  4. I have a degree at law, recent MS in regulatory studies. Licensed in KS, admitted b4 S& 7th circuit, but not to Indiana bar due to political correctness. Blacklisted, nearly unemployable due to hostile state action. Big Idea: Headwinds can overcome, esp for those not within the contours of the bell curve, the Lego Movie happiness set forth above. That said, even without the blacklisting for holding ideas unacceptable to the Glorious State, I think the idea presented above that a law degree open many vistas other than being a galley slave to elitist lawyers is pretty much laughable. (Did the law professors of Indiana pay for this to be published?)

  5. Joe, you might want to do some reading on the fate of Hoosier whistleblowers before you get your expectations raised up.