ILNews

Justices take 6 cases, reject 26

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer in six of 32 cases reviewed in the week ending Dec. 14, according to the transfer disposition list posted Monday on the court website. 

Among the cases the court will hear is Mary Elizabeth Santelli, as Administrator of the Estate of James F. Santelli v. Abu M. Rahmatullah, individually, and d/b/a Super 8 Motel, 49S04-1212-CT-667. The case dates to a 2005 murder of a hotel guest by a former employee who gained entry to the guest’s room with a keycard he retained after he left employment.

The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded to the Marion Superior Court an award in excess of $2 million to the estate for a new trial. Questions arising on the appeal, in which both the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana and the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association filed amicus briefs, include whether the state’s Comparative Fault Act abrogates the common law very duty doctrine and whether a jury should have been allowed to allocate fault to the victim.

Also on the transfer docket was Cory Heinzman v. State of Indiana, 29S02-1212-CR-678, in which justices remanded for re-entry of a sentence for Cory Heinzman, a former child protective services caseworker in Hamilton County convicted of multiple charges of official misconduct and sex offenses against minors. 

Also granted transfer were:

  • State of Indiana v. Russell Oney, 49S05-1212-CR-668
  • Jamar Washington v. State of Indiana, 49S02-1212-CR-669
  • Andrew Humphreys v. State of Indiana, 79S04-1212-CR-670
  • Hassan Alsheik v. Alice Guerrero, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of I.A., Deceased, 45S04-1212-CT-675, one of four opinions issued Dec. 12 regarding prejudgment interest. 



 


 

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. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  2. If the end result is to simply record the spoke word, then perhaps some day digital recording may eventually be the status quo. However, it is a shallow view to believe the professional court reporter's function is to simply report the spoken word and nothing else. There are many aspects to being a professional court reporter, and many aspects involved in producing a professional and accurate transcript. A properly trained professional steno court reporter has achieved a skill set in a field where the average dropout rate in court reporting schools across the nation is 80% due to the difficulty of mastering the necessary skills. To name just a few "extras" that a court reporter with proper training brings into a courtroom or a deposition suite; an understanding of legal procedure, technology specific to the legal profession, and an understanding of what is being said by the attorneys and litigants (which makes a huge difference in the quality of the transcript). As to contracting, or anti-contracting the argument is simple. The court reporter as governed by our ethical standards is to be the independent, unbiased individual in a deposition or courtroom setting. When one has entered into a contract with any party, insurance carrier, etc., then that reporter is no longer unbiased. I have been a court reporter for over 30 years and I echo Mr. Richardson's remarks that I too am here to serve.

  3. A competitive bid process is ethical and appropriate especially when dealing with government agencies and large corporations, but an ethical line is crossed when court reporters in Pittsburgh start charging exorbitant fees on opposing counsel. This fee shifting isn't just financially biased, it undermines the entire justice system, giving advantages to those that can afford litigation the most. It makes no sense.

  4. "a ttention to detail is an asset for all lawyers." Well played, Indiana Lawyer. Well played.

  5. I have a appeals hearing for the renewal of my LPN licenses and I need an attorney, the ones I have spoke to so far want the money up front and I cant afford that. I was wondering if you could help me find one that takes payments or even a pro bono one. I live in Indiana just north of Indianapolis.

ADVERTISEMENT