ILNews

Opinions April 4, 2014

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

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
The following opinion was issued after IL deadline Thursday.

United States of America v. Lori Hargis
12-2153
Criminal. Affirms 60-month sentence for Lori Hargis’ conviction of conspiracy to use fire to commit wire fraud for her role in recruiting a man to set fire to her home to collect insurance proceeds. Circuit judges rejected Hargis’ argument that the District Court erred when it adjusted her sentence from the guideline range of 15 to 21 months in prison, finding that the judge adequately explained his rationale for imposing sentence.

Indiana Supreme Court
The following opinion was issued after IL deadline Thursday.

Christopher Groce and Tracey Groce v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company, and Michael A. Meek
48S02-1307-CT-472
Civil tort. Affirms trial court grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants that also was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Applying Filip v. Block, 879 N.E.2d 1076 (Ind. 2008), justices held the trial court properly granted summary judgment in the Groce’s negligence claim because their homeowner’s insurance policy failed to cover full replacement value after a 2007 fire. While the claim was filed less than two years after the fire, justices held that in the exercise of ordinary diligence in reviewing their homeowner’s insurance policy, the Groces could have timely discovered that the company's replacement cost liability was capped at the dwelling loss coverage limit no later than the date of their first policy renewal in 2003.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Bruce E. Phillips v. State of Indiana (NFP)
47A01-1304-CR-148
Criminal. Affirms convictions and aggregate 16-year sentence for Class B felony conspiracy to commit dealing in methamphetamine and Class D felony possession of chemical reagents or precursors with intent to manufacture controlled substances.

Corey Coleman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1307-CR-594
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

In re: the Grandparent Visitation of C.S.N.: Brooke Neuhoff v. Scott A. Ubelhor and Angela S. Ubelhor (NFP)
19A05-1311-MI-542
Miscellaneous. Stays trial court order granting visitation with minor child to parental grandparents and retains jurisdiction. Remands to the trial court with instructions to issue new findings and conclusions within 30 days. Grandparent visitation is suspended pending review.

Shawna Gallagher v. Jacob Gallagher (NFP)
37A03-1308-DR-342
Domestic. Reverses order modifying physical custody of minor children in favor of father, Jacob Gallagher, finding the trial court erred because there was no substantial change in circumstance.

In re: the Marriage of: Carrie A. Chapman v. Stephen L. Chapman (NFP)
02A05-1307-DR-343
Domestic. Affirms award of child support.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT