ILNews

Justices take case alleging Wabash hazing

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court will determine whether a college and a fraternity are liable for injuries a student received as a result of a prank, and whether the incident rises to hazing.

Justices on Monday agreed to hear Brian Yost v. Wabash College, Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity, Inc., Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity - Indiana Gamma Chapter at Wabash College, and Nathan Cravens, 54A01-1201-CT-31, which divided a Court of Appeals panel. The majority found that a “showering” episode in which four fraternity brothers forcibly carried Yost to the shower and ran water on him was not hazing. Judge Nancy Vaidik dissented.

Yost said he was placed in a chokehold, lost consciousness and was injured during the showering, and he eventually withdrew from college.

Justices on Monday also granted transfer in four other cases. They are:

  • Phillip T. Billingsley v. State of Indiana, 02A05-1204-CR-216, in which a man convicted of Class D felony possession of marijuana appeals had his motion to suppress evidence denied.
  • American Cold Storage, et al. v. The City of Boonville, 87A01-1112-PL-610, in which a divided appeals court reversed a trial court decision upholding an annexation by the city, holding that the trial court erred by counting separate state-owned parcels of a highway for purposes of remonstrance.
  • Patrick Austin v. State of Indiana, 20A03-1112-CR-588, in which the Court of Appeals rejected Patrick Austin’s bid to overturn two Class A felony possession of cocaine convictions because he was denied a speedy trial and because a tendered jury instruction was rejected.
  •  In the Matter of the Adoption of Minor Children: C.B.M. and C.R.M.: C.A.B. v. J.D.M. and K.L.M., 37A03-1204-AD-149, in which an appellate panel reversed a trial court and ruled that a birth mother was denied due process when her children were adopted while an appeal of her termination of parental rights was pending.


Justices declined to grant transfer in 20 cases. Transfers for the week ending March 8 may be viewed here.



 

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. For many years this young man was "family" being my cousin's son. Then he decided to ignore my existence and that of my daughter who was very hurt by his actions after growing up admiring, Jason. Glad he is doing well, as for his opinion, if you care so much you wouldn't ignore the feelings of those who cared so much about you for years, Jason.

  2. Good riddance to this dangerous activist judge

  3. What is the one thing the Hoosier legal status quo hates more than a whistleblower? A lawyer whistleblower taking on the system man to man. That must never be rewarded, must always, always, always be punished, lest the whole rotten tree be felled.

  4. I want to post this to keep this tread alive and hope more of David's former clients might come forward. In my case, this coward of a man represented me from June 2014 for a couple of months before I fired him. I knew something was wrong when he blatantly lied about what he had advised me in my contentious and unfortunate divorce trial. His impact on the proceedings cast a very long shadow and continues to impact me after a lengthy 19 month divorce. I would join a class action suit.

  5. The dispute in LB Indiana regarding lake front property rights is typical of most beach communities along our Great Lakes. Simply put, communication to non owners when visiting the lakefront would be beneficial. The Great Lakes are designated navigational waters (including shorelines). The high-water mark signifies the area one is able to navigate. This means you can walk, run, skip, etc. along the shores. You can't however loiter, camp, sunbath in front of someones property. Informational signs may be helpful to owners and visitors. Our Great Lakes are a treasure that should be enjoyed by all. PS We should all be concerned that the Long Beach, Indiana community is on septic systems.

ADVERTISEMENT