ILNews

Justices accept 4 cases

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court has taken four cases, including one that deals with an insurance dispute over cleanup costs.

In State Automobile Mutual Insurance Co. v. Flexdar Inc., No. 49S02-1104-PL-199, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Flexdar in State Automobile Mutual Insurance Co.’s action seeking declaration that it owed no coverage for environmental cleanup costs. The judges held State Auto’s pollution exclusion is ambiguous and unenforceable, so it didn’t preclude coverage. The Court of Appeals also concluded that Indiana Evidence Rule 407 may bar evidence of subsequent policy revisions offered to resolve ambiguity in an executed insurance contract.

In Tonya Peete v. State of Indiana, No. 49S02-1104-CR-201, the Court of Appeals affirmed Tonya Peete’s convictions of two counts of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy. She argued that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to show that she knowingly or intentionally violated an ex parte protective order.

In Glenn L. Carpenter v. State of Indiana, No. 49S02-1104-CR-198, the lower appellate court affirmed Glenn Carpenter’s conviction of Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent offender, his adjudication as a habitual offender, and the 40-year sentence imposed. Carpenter challenged the admission of evidence that drugs and paraphernalia were found on him and his sentence, which was enhanced by 20 years on the habitual offender count.

In Christopher Jewell v. State of Indiana, No. 32S04-1104-CR-200, the Court of Appeals affirmed Christopher Jewell’s convictions of and aggregate 40-year sentence for six counts of sexual misconduct and child molesting. He argued recorded statements admitted as evidence were procured and admitted in violation of his constitutional rights to counsel.

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Contact Lea Shelemey attorney in porter county Indiana. She just helped us win our case...she is awesome...

  2. We won!!!! It was a long expensive battle but we did it. I just wanted people to know it is possible. And if someone can point me I. The right direction to help change the way the courts look as grandparents as only grandparents. The courts assume the parent does what is in the best interest of the child...and the court is wrong. A lot of the time it is spite and vindictiveness that separates grandparents and grandchildren. It should not have been this long and hard and expensive...Something needs to change...

  3. Typo on # of Indiana counties

  4. The Supreme Court is very proud that they are Giving a billion dollar public company from Texas who owns Odyssey a statewide monopoly which consultants have said is not unnecessary but worse they have already cost Hoosiers well over $100 MILLION, costing tens of millions every year and Odyssey is still not connected statewide which is in violation of state law. The Supreme Court is using taxpayer money and Odyssey to compete against a Hoosier company who has the only system in Indiana that is connected statewide and still has 40 of the 82 counties despite the massive spending and unnecessary attacks

  5. Here's a recent resource regarding steps that should be taken for removal from the IN sex offender registry. I haven't found anything as comprehensive as of yet. Hopefully this is helpful - http://www.chjrlaw.com/removal-indiana-sex-offender-registry/

ADVERTISEMENT