Flaherty & Collins, Inc., v. BBR-Vision I, and New Castle Realty, LLC - 10/18/12

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Thursday  October 18, 2012 
11:00 AM  EST

11a.m. 49A05-1111-PL-569. BBR-Vision I, L.P. entered into a management agreement with Flaherty & Collins, Inc., whereby BBR-Vision I, L.P. hired Flaherty & Collins, Inc. to manage a low-income housing apartment complex owned and operated by BBR-Vision I, L.P. and its general partner, New Castle Realty, LLC. After an employee of Flaherty & Collins, Inc. altered the income certification documents of several tenants, BBR-Vision I, L.P. and New Castle Realty, LLC filed a five-count complaint against Flaherty & Collins, Inc. The parties filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment. The trial court denied Flaherty & Collins, Inc.’s motion for partial summary judgment, finding that the designated evidence established a claim and entitlement to damages under the Indiana’s Crime Victims Relief Act and that New Castle Realty, LLC has standing. The trial court granted BBR-Vision I, L.P. and New Castle Realty, LLC’s motion for partial summary judgment on their indemnity and fraud claims.

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT