ILNews

Opinions Aug. 6, 2014

August 6, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Kevin Davis v. State of Indiana
49A05-1310-CR-523
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury. L.H.’s statements to police identifying Davis as participating in the beating and robbery were properly admitted, the trial court did not err when it determined two witnesses had made themselves unavailable and therefore allowed their depositions to be admitted into evidence at trial, and there is sufficient evidence supporting the conviction.

Craig Alvey v. State of Indiana

20A04-1310-MI-533
Miscellaneous. Affirms petition for rehearing of the denial of Alvey’s petition to expunge records of his conviction of Class A misdemeanor possession of cocaine. Finds that Alvey does not have to wait three years to file a new petition to expunge his Class A misdemeanor conviction under the new, more liberal standards of I.C. 35-38-8-2 (2014). Affirms in all other respects.

Cherokee Air Products, Inc., Cherokee Family Limited Partnership, Tippmann Industrial Products, Inc., Dennis Tippmann, Sr. Family Partnership, LLP, and Tippmann Farms, LLC v. Bruce E. Buchan
02A05-1312-PL-635
Civil plenary. Affirms on interlocutory appeal the order granting partial summary judgment in favor of Buchan in an action alleging breach of his employment contract and seeking damages. There are no genuine issues of material fact precluding the entry of partial summary judgment on the issue of his entitlement to retire.

Arthur Gutierrez, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1309-CR-365
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting.

In the Matter of J.K., A Child in Need of Services, M.K., Father v. Marion County Department of Child Services and Child Advocates, Inc. (NFP)
49A02-1312-JC-1008
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication that J.K. is a child in need of services.

Jeffery A. Foster v. State of Indiana (NFP)
14A01-1311-CR-522
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery resulting in bodily injury and imposition of $120 in costs and fees. Remands for hearing to assess Foster’s ability to pay an additional $48 in other fees.

Daniel Utterback v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1312-CR-1021
Criminal. Affirms seven-year sentence for Class C felony child molesting.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Living in South Bend, I travel to Michigan a lot. Virtually every gas station sells cold beer there. Many sell the hard stuff too. Doesn't seem to be a big deal there.

  2. Mr. Ricker, how foolish of you to think that by complying with the law you would be ok. Don't you know that Indiana is a state that welcomes monopolies, and that Indiana's legislature is the one entity in this state that believes monopolistic practices (such as those engaged in by Indiana Association of Beverage Retailers) make Indiana a "business-friendly" state? How can you not see this????

  3. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  4. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  5. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

ADVERTISEMENT