Courts

Couple not entitled to attorney fees under Crime Victims Relief Act

March 3, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed that a Lake County couple who won a fraudulent misrepresentation judgment against the previous owners of the couple’s home are not entitled to certain fees under the Indiana Crime Victims Relief Act.
More

COA: Trial court is wrong to order shareholders to pay attorney fees

March 3, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
In a case that stems from a failed transaction in 2000 to purchase an event-decorating company, the Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed the order that shareholders of a corporation are liable for attorney fees on a wrongful stop-payment claim.
More

Indiana Supreme Court awards more than $232,000 in grants to counties

February 28, 2014
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has awarded $232,470 in grant money to 23 counties to support local family court projects. Since the Family Court project began in 1999, the Supreme Court had distributed more than $3 million in “seed money” to support family court projects.
More

Appeals court denies man’s request to be removed from sex offender registry

February 28, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
Using the “intents-effects” test, the Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed that the additional registration requirements imposed on a man on the sex offender registry after a 2006 change in the law do not amount to an impermissible ex post facto violation.
More

COA affirms the voiding of $500,000 default judgment against American Legion post

February 28, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
A Marion Superior court correctly set aside default judgment against an American Legion post after finding the method employed to serve process on the organization was not the best way to inform it of a woman’s lawsuit, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
More

7th Circuit affirms denial of motion to suppress search of car

February 27, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the denial of an automobile passenger’s motion to suppress evidence found in the car during a traffic stop, which led to his eventual pleading guilty to a heroin offense. The judges found no error by the District judge in crediting the testimony of the police officer who pulled the vehicle over because he believed the speed it was traveling and distance to the car in front of it violated Indiana law.
More

Judge orders Floyd County to pay Camm defense attorneys’ bills

February 27, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
The dispute over trial expenses between the attorneys representing David Camm and Floyd County came closer to a resolution Wednesday with Judge Jonathan Dartt ordering the county auditor to pay about $140,000.
More

Judges split over Fourth Amendment violation

February 27, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
Two of the three judges on an Indiana Court of Appeals panel affirmed the suppression of marijuana and a pipe found on a man during a traffic stop, with the dissenting judge believing there was no infringement on the man’s Fourth Amendment rights.
More

Mother’s appeal of termination of parental rights dismissed

February 27, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has dismissed a mother’s appeal from the order terminating her parental rights to her twins, ruling she forfeited her right to appeal because she failed to file a timely notice of appeal.
More

Appellate court reinstates habitual traffic violator charge

February 27, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
Finding a trial court abused its discretion when it granted a man’s motion to dismiss a Class D felony operating a vehicle as a habitual traffic violator charge, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed and ordered the charge reinstated.
More

Justices suspend David Wyser, former Brizzi deputy prosecutor

February 27, 2014
Dave Stafford
Former Marion County Deputy Prosecutor David Wyser, who pleaded guilty last year to bribery in a federal public-corruption probe, has been suspended from the practice of law.
More

Elkhart attorney suspended for ‘lack of respect’ for clients and courts

February 26, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has suspended an Elkhart County attorney for at least two years after finding he committed numerous violations of the Indiana Professional Rules of Conduct, including throwing away client files that contained confidential information.
More

Judges decline to find OWI statute unconstitutional

February 26, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals rejected a man’s claim that the statute proscribing the operation of a vehicle with a Schedule I or II controlled substance violates the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Indiana Constitution.
More

Mom and pop store can’t proceed pro se in Coach trademark lawsuit

February 26, 2014
Dave Stafford
The owners of a southern Indiana general store accused in a federal lawsuit of selling knockoff high-end Coach-brand products may not represent pro se their incorporated general store named in the suit.
More

No relief in sight for busy Southern District judges

February 26, 2014
Dave Stafford
Judges of the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Indiana are among the nation’s busiest. They have been for years, and that’s unlikely to change anytime soon.
More

Campus fraternity chapter may be liable for alleged hazing injury

February 26, 2014
Dave Stafford
A Wabash College fraternity pledge’s injury claim resulting from alleged hazing, ruled on recently by the Indiana Supreme Court, turned not on whether he was hazed inside the frat house, but on who may be liable.
More

Indiana joins brief seeking to halt EPA-led plan to clean up Chesapeake Bay

February 26, 2014
Dave Stafford
Decades of squabbles over cleaning up one of America’s most historic but polluted waters resulted in an agreement between states and the federal government that supporters say could restore the Chesapeake Bay to a swimmable, fishable national treasure. But if Indiana and other states without a direct stake in the Chesapeake have their way, the cleanup hashed out between bay states and the Environmental Protection Agency will be stopped.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 2/26/14

February 26, 2014
IL Staff
Read who's received a public reprimand and who has been suspended by the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Killer’s 50-year conspiracy sentence vacated as double jeopardy

February 25, 2014
Dave Stafford
The sentence of a man convicted of killing his ex-wife was reduced by 50 years Tuesday when the Indiana Court of Appeals granted in part his petition for post-conviction relief.
More

Appeal filed beyond 30-day limit must raise new facts

February 25, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
In dismissing an interlocutory appeal as untimely, the Indiana Court of Appeals told the appellants they still have the ability to attack the trial court’s interlocutory orders.
More

High school basketball team’s hair-length policy is discriminatory

February 24, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
A dispute pitting long hair against an attempt to promote a clean-cut image of Hoosier boys’ basketball is headed for overtime since the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found a high school’s hair-length requirements pertaining only to male basketball players violated equal protection and Title IX.
More

Correctional officer fails to support claims of discrimination against employer

February 24, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
A former officer in the Indiana Department of Correction had her claims of employment discrimination and retaliation rejected by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on the grounds she failed to provide supporting evidence.
More

Justices to review sanctions in false emergency detention report

February 24, 2014
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Supreme Court will review a case in which the Court of Appeals tossed an indirect civil contempt of court finding but let stand fines against a nurse accused of making false statements about the mental health of a co-worker that led to emergency detention.
More

Child support arrearage dispute sent back to trial court

February 24, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
The Indiana Court of Appeals instructed a trial court to do the work necessary before entering an order garnishing a parent’s money for child support. 
More

Injunction denial stands in Notre Dame contraception case

February 24, 2014
Dave Stafford
A divided 7th Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed denial of a temporary injunction sought by the University of Notre Dame to block enforcement of the contraception mandate contained in the Affordable Care Act.
More
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Yes diversity is so very important. With justice Rucker off ... the court is too white. Still too male. No Hispanic justice. No LGBT justice. And there are other checkboxes missing as well. This will not do. I say hold the seat until a physically handicapped Black Lesbian of Hispanic heritage and eastern religious creed with bipolar issues can be located. Perhaps an international search, with a preference for third world candidates, is indicated. A non English speaker would surely increase our diversity quotient!!!

  2. First, I want to thank Justice Rucker for his many years of public service, not just at the appellate court level for over 25 years, but also when he served the people of Lake County as a Deputy Prosecutor, City Attorney for Gary, IN, and in private practice in a smaller, highly diverse community with a history of serious economic challenges, ethnic tensions, and recently publicized but apparently long-standing environmental health risks to some of its poorest residents. Congratulations for having the dedication & courage to practice law in areas many in our state might have considered too dangerous or too poor at different points in time. It was also courageous to step into a prominent and highly visible position of public service & respect in the early 1990's, remaining in a position that left you open to state-wide public scrutiny (without any glitches) for over 25 years. Yes, Hoosiers of all backgrounds can take pride in your many years of public service. But people of color who watched your ascent to the highest levels of state government no doubt felt even more as you transcended some real & perhaps some perceived social, economic, academic and professional barriers. You were living proof that, with hard work, dedication & a spirit of public service, a person who shared their same skin tone or came from the same county they grew up in could achieve great success. At the same time, perhaps unknowingly, you helped fellow members of the judiciary, court staff, litigants and the public better understand that differences that are only skin-deep neither define nor limit a person's character, abilities or prospects in life. You also helped others appreciate that people of different races & backgrounds can live and work together peacefully & productively for the greater good of all. Those are truths that didn't have to be written down in court opinions. Anyone paying attention could see that truth lived out every day you devoted to public service. I believe you have been a "trailblazer" in Indiana's legal community and its judiciary. I also embrace your belief that society's needs can be better served when people in positions of governmental power reflect the many complexions of the population that they serve. Whether through greater understanding across the existing racial spectrum or through the removal of some real and some perceived color-based, hope-crushing barriers to life opportunities & success, movement toward a more reflective representation of the population being governed will lead to greater and uninterrupted respect for laws designed to protect all peoples' rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. Thanks again for a job well-done & for the inevitable positive impact your service has had - and will continue to have - on countless Hoosiers of all backgrounds & colors.

  3. Diversity is important, but with some limitations. For instance, diversity of experience is a great thing that can be very helpful in certain jobs or roles. Diversity of skin color is never important, ever, under any circumstance. To think that skin color changes one single thing about a person is patently racist and offensive. Likewise, diversity of values is useless. Some values are better than others. In the case of a supreme court justice, I actually think diversity is unimportant. The justices are not to impose their own beliefs on rulings, but need to apply the law to the facts in an objective manner.

  4. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  5. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

ADVERTISEMENT