ILNews

Justices take grandparent visitation, divorce cases

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Cases involving grandparents’ visitation rights and modification of parental custody orders have been added to arguments that will be heard by the Indiana Supreme Court.

Justices unanimously granted transfer to a Madison Superior case, In Re the Guardianship of A.J.A., and L.M.A., J.C. v. J.B. and S.B., 48S02-1305-GU-398. In that case, a grandmother who sought visitation with grandchildren who are under the care of guardians persuaded the Court of Appeals to reverse a trial court order vacating visitation rights even though the grandmother lacked standing to pursue the original visitation order.

The court also unanimously granted transfer in Jason Wilson v. Kelly (Wilson) Myers, 71S03-1305-DR-399, a not-for-publication Court of Appeals decision from Shelby Superior Court. An appellate panel in that case affirmed a trial court order modifying primary physical custody because of the lack of formality during various proceedings.   

The court’s transfer list for the week ending May 31 may be viewed here.

The list also includes a Randolph Circuit case the justices decided on Friday, Brian Scott Hartman v. State of Indiana, 68S01-1305-CR-395. The court ruled in Hartman that statements made during interrogation of a criminal defendant who previously requested an attorney were not admissible.

Meanwhile, two cases failed to win transfer by the narrowest of margins.

Justices Steven David and Loretta Rush were in the minority voting to grant transfer in a scope-of-public-records case, Seth Anderson v. Huntington County Board of Commissioners, 35A04-1207-MI-357.  David and Rush also who would have taken the NFP case In Re the Matter of A.R., et al., Alleged Children In Need of Services: T.M. v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, 52A02-1205-JC-388.

 

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. Can I get this form on line,if not where can I obtain one. I am eligible.

  2. What a fine example of the best of the Hoosier tradition! How sad that the AP has to include partisan snark in the obit for this great American patriot and adventurer.

  3. Why are all these lawyers yakking to the media about pending matters? Trial by media? What the devil happened to not making extrajudicial statements? The system is falling apart.

  4. It is a sad story indeed as this couple has been only in survival mode, NOT found guilty with Ponzi, shaken down for 5 years and pursued by prosecution that has been ignited by a civil suit with very deep pockets wrenched in their bitterness...It has been said that many of us are breaking an average of 300 federal laws a day without even knowing it. Structuring laws, & civilForfeiture laws are among the scariest that need to be restructured or repealed . These laws were initially created for drug Lords and laundering money and now reach over that line. Here you have a couple that took out their own money, not drug money, not laundering. Yes...Many upset that they lost money...but how much did they make before it all fell apart? No one ask that question? A civil suit against Williams was awarded because he has no more money to fight...they pushed for a break in order...they took all his belongings...even underwear, shoes and clothes? who does that? What allows that? Maybe if you had the picture of him purchasing a jacket at the Goodwill just to go to court the next day...his enemy may be satisfied? But not likely...bitterness is a master. For happy ending lovers, you will be happy to know they have a faith that has changed their world and a solid love that many of us can only dream about. They will spend their time in federal jail for taking their money from their account, but at the end of the day they have loyal friends, a true love and a hope of a new life in time...and none of that can be bought or taken That is the real story.

  5. Could be his email did something especially heinous, really over the top like questioning Ind S.Ct. officials or accusing JLAP of being the political correctness police.

ADVERTISEMENT