ILNews

Indiana justices deny 8 cases, plus associational standing appeal

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court declined to take eight cases last week, and by a split vote the court also reversed a prior decision to hear an electric utility’s appeal based on an associational standing question.

In a transfer disposition order, the state’s highest court declined a total of nine cases, including Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corp., et al. v. Save the Valley, et al., No. 49A02-1011-MI-1178, that had previously been granted transfer in February.

The Court of Appeals ruled on the case in August, finding that it had already ruled on an associational standing question six years ago in the same case and that the electric utility was trying to re-litigate that issue. The court declined to revisit the case, based on the law-of-the-case doctrine. Particularly, the intermediate appellate judges rejected IKEC claims that the state justices didn’t adequately consider a similar case pending at the time, even though the original Court of Appeals panel did address that issue and the Supreme Court denied transfer.

The Court of Appeals panel also dismissed arguments that the precedent wasn’t valid because the justices later issued K.S. v. State, 849 N.E.2d 538 (Ind. 2006), and the electric utility contended that voided the Save the Valley issue of associational standing. But after granting transfer earlier this year, a March 22 order from the Supreme Court says that the Court of Appeals decision from last year is reinstated.

Acting Chief Justice Brent Dickson signed the order and Justices Frank Sullivan and Robert Rucker concurred, although Justices Randall T. Shepard and Steven David voted to grant transfer.

The other cases denied transfer are: Outboard Boating Club of Evansville, Inc., and Small-Craft Boaters, Inc. v. Indiana State Department of Health, No. 82A01-1102-PL-52; The Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: D.H.H. & A.M.H., and Carrie Crawford v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, No. 71A03-1107-JT-322; Charles Lawrence, Sr. v. State of Indiana, No. 02A03-1105-CR-194; Jason B. Forrest v. State of Indiana, No. 91A05-1106-CR-324; Joseph A. Taylor v. Alan P. Finnan, No. 48A02-1105-MI-547; In Re: The Order of Contempt Against Craig Benson, Martinsville Depot, Inc., and SBS Enterprises, Inc. v. Co-Alliance, LLP, No. 55A04-1010-CC-646; Thomas M. Slaats v. Sally E. Slaats, No. 87A01-1009-DR-523; and Shawnee Construction and Engineering v. Don C. Stanley, Jr, No. 02A04-1010-CT-610, in which Dickson voted to grant transfer.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT