ILNews

Opinions March 4, 2014

March 4, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Court of Appeals opinions were posted after IL deadline Monday:
Tanya R. Dawson v. State of Indiana, City of Indianapolis, and Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (NFP)
49A02-1308-MI-716
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of motion for summary judgment in an action filed by the state, city of Indianapolis and the IMPD for forfeiture of Dawson’s 2000 Chevy Tahoe.

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. Janice M. Stern (NFP)
82A04-1306-MF-282
Mortgage foreclosure. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Stern in the instant mortgage foreclosure action. Remands for further proceedings.

Tuesday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company v. Stephen W. Robertson, Insurance Commissioner of the State of Indiana, et. al.
49A04-1302-PL-84
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court order upholding an administrative order that Commonwealth take certain actions to cure its violations of the Rate Statute, the Unsafe Business Practices Statute and the Gross Premium Tax Statute. Concludes that substantial evidence supports the IDOI’s determination that Commonwealth violated the statutes and that the cures imposed by the IDOI for Commonwealth’s violations of these statutes are authorized by the Cure Statute.

Jermaine Christopher Scott v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1307-CR-344
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.

Randy L. Madewell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
41A05-1305-CR-254
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for three counts of Class D felony home improvement fraud and three counts of Class B misdemeanor home improvement fraud.

Marcus Pernell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1307-CR-345
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery and remands with instructions for the trial court to enter a correct abstract of judgment.

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