ILNews

Opinions May 28, 2014

May 28, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Hamilton County Assessor v. SPD Realty, LLC
49T10-1104-TA-28
Tax. Affirms the Board of Tax Review’s final determination that SPD Realty’s real and personal property qualified for a charitable purposes exemption for the 2009 tax year. The board’s final determination is not contrary to law and unsupported by substantial evidence because New Life occupied and used the property for a charitable purpose; SPD owned the property for a charitable purpose; and the property was predominately used for charitable purposes.

Wednesday’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Joshua Bunn v. Khoury Enterprises Inc.
13-2292
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Bunn’s former employer, a Dairy Queen franchise, on his claims that his employer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. Bunn’s failure-to-accommodate claim falls short because his employer did reasonably accommodate his disability. His disparate treatment claim fails because he has not introduced sufficient evidence to create a triable issue of material fact and because the undisputed facts show that the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Craig Alvey v. State of Indiana
20A04-1310-MI-533
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of Alvey’s petition to expunge the records of his conviction. He did not meet all the requirements of the expungement statute because he admitted twice to violating his probation before successfully completing his sentence.

Melisa R. Digbie v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Eaglecare LLC
93A02-1312-EX-1054
Agency action. Reverses decision of the Review Board of the Department of Workforce Development in favor of Eaglecare LLC on Digbie’s claim for unemployment benefits and its determination that Digbie received notice of the Aug. 6 hearing. The DWD presented no evidence that it mailed notice of the hearing to Digbie, so it was not entitled to the rebuttable presumption that she received notice. Remands for a new evidentiary hearing.

Tyrece Robertson v. State of Indiana
49A05-1310-CR-487
Criminal. Reverses convictions of Class D felony attempted residential entry and Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief. The trial court erred when it overruled Robertson’s Baston challenge contesting the state’s use of a peremptory challenge to strike a juror.

A.H. v. State of Indiana
49A05-1309-JV-450
Juvenile. Affirms juvenile court’s restitution order requiring A.H. to provide restitution to the probation department for the electronic monitoring bracelet she cut off and left at a park. The admission agreement left disposition open to the juvenile court and the court did not fail to inquire into her ability to pay.

Jeremy L. Honaker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
39A01-1306-PC-291
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Napoleon Wilson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1308-CR-434
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress the results of a traffic stop.

Jory D. Peters v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1305-CR-177
Criminal. Affirms murder conviction.

Idowa Hood v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1309-CR-828
Criminal. Reverses sentence and orders trial court to resentence Hood and calculate his pretrial credit time in accordance with I.C. 35-38-3-2(b)(4).

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: S.S. (Minor Child), and S.S. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1309-JT-784
Juvenile. Affirms order denying mother’s motion for relief under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) and involuntarily terminating her parental rights.

Rachel M. Swaney and Eric Swaney v. Chrysler Group LLC and Grieger's Motor Sales, Inc. (NFP)
64A03-1401-CT-25
Civil tort. Reverses dismissal of the Swaneys’ complaint for failure to prosecute and remands for further proceedings.

Gary Maxwell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1308-CR-427
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated in a manner that endangers a person.  

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: A.C. (Minor Child) and E.C. (Mother) and R.C. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
48A02-1310-JT-875
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Johnnie Winford v. State of Indiana (NFP)

22A01-1307-CR-303
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent child.

Mercedes Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1311-CR-962
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor theft.

Jeffrey Duncan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1310-CR-456
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a BAC equivalent to 0.15 and determination as a habitual substance offender.

Kevin A. Deubner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1309-CR-439
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in community corrections program.

Deandrew Russell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1308-CR-389
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony criminal confinement.

Vincent W. Hren v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1310-CR-436
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felonies operating a vehicle as a habitual traffic violator and operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Michael Widup v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1310-CR-861
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class A felony child molesting and three convictions of Class C felony child molesting but vacates one conviction of Class C felony child molesting as it violates double jeopardy. Vacates sentence imposed on that count.

William Crockett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1307-PC-374
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Jesse Clements v. Davina Curry (NFP)
49A02-1308-CT-713
Civil tort. Affirms dismissal of Clements’ counterclaim, reverses grant of summary judgment to Curry and remands for a hearing.

Rashawn Speed v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1308-CR-696
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony child molesting, Class C felony child molesting and Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Steve D. Boyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1310-CR-438
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class B felony dealing in narcotics.

Justin M. Alexander v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1310-CR-403, 02A03-1310-CR-404, 02A03-1310-CR-405
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentences in three separate, but related, criminal appeals. Remands for clarification of the sentencing orders.

Jason Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1310-CR-891
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony residential entry, Class A misdemeanor interference with reporting a crime and Class A misdemeanor conversion.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline Wednesday.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT