Opinions
Opinions Oct. 4, 2010
Indiana Court of Appeals
Donald
L. Pruitt v. State of Indiana
55A01-0912-CR-597
Criminal. Affirms denial of Pruitt’s motion to suppress, who was charged with operating a motor vehicle after driving
privileges had been forfeited for life as a Class C felony. The lack of limiting language in Indiana Code Section 9-30-10-17
supports that Indiana Code sections 9-21-18-1 to 9-21-18-15 do not bar law enforcement officers from investigating violations
in private parking lots in the absence of a contractual agreement with the property owner. Concludes the police officer had
reasonable suspicion to stop Pruitt for driving without headlights.
Opinions Oct. 1, 2010
Annex Books, Inc., et al. v. City of Indianapolis, Ind.
09-4156
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Affirms preliminary injunction of ordinance requiring adult bookstores to be closed certain hours. The single article introduced by Indianapolis didn’t support its argument and the evidence of arrest data near the plaintiffs’ store appears to support the plaintiffs.
Opinions Sept. 30, 2010
State of Indiana v. James G. Lucas
91A05-1003-CR-247
Criminal. Reverses and remands Lucas’s motion to suppress results from a Datamaster chemical breath test in jail, following two failed portable breath tests in the field. Rules a portable breath test mouthpiece is not a foreign substance that will act to invalidate the results of a Datamaster.
Opinions Sept. 29, 2010
Efren R. Diaz v. State of Indiana
20S05-0911-PC-521
Post conviction. Refusing to admit the chart on grounds of hearsay was an error. It was prepared by an expert witness of Diaz on the misinterpretations between what the court said in English and what the translator told Diaz in Spanish, and the witness’ expertise was hindered by its exclusion. The evidence before the post-conviction court doesn’t reveal whether Diaz was provided with accurate interpreting. Directs the trial court to commission its own translation of the plea hearing and the sentencing hearing to rehear such evidence to answer whether Diaz’s plea was voluntary and intelligent.
Opinions Sept. 28, 2010
Sarah Haag, et al. v. Mark Castro, The Indiana Youth Soccer Association, et al.
29A04-1001-CT-10
Civil. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Virginia Surety Co. Members of the Carmel Commotion Soccer Team traveled to Colorado for a soccer tournament. While in Colorado, the team decided to go on a white-water rafting trip as a team-building activity. While traveling to raft, the van collided with another vehicle and team members were injured. Virginia Surety argued that while the team was sanctioned to attend and compete at the tournament, the use of the van to go white-water rafting was not a use “in the business of the Named Insured” and Indiana Youth Soccer Association did not have knowledge of or authorize the rafting activity. Judge Riley dissents.
Opinions Sept. 27, 2010
Brian P. White v. State of Indiana (NFP)
53A01-0910-CR-515
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for murder.
Opinions Sept. 24, 2010
Subpoena to Crisis Connection, Inc., State of Indiana v. Ronald Keith Fromme
19A05-0910-CR-602
Criminal. Grants rehearing for clarification and affirms original decision outlining the threshold a defendant must make before obtaining an in camera review of records that are privileged.
Opinions Sept. 23, 2010
Commitment of A.L.
49A02-1001-MH-76
Mental health. Affirms order of temporary commitment. Any error in the admission of evidence or consideration of Wishard’s argument as to A.L.’s dangerousness was not a blatant violation of fundamental fairness and didn’t cause substantial and apparent harm to her.
Opinions Sept. 22, 2010
Rosalyn West v. Betty Wadlington,et al.
49S02-1009-CV-509
Civil. Reverses trial court’s grant of Larkin and the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department’s motions to dismiss West’s defamation and invasion of privacy claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Holds that a trial court with general jurisdiction to adjudicate claims of defamation and invasion of privacy is not ousted of jurisdiction merely because a religious defense to the claims is asserted. Remands for further proceedings.
Opinions Sept. 21, 2010
Max Koenig v. State of Indiana
42S04-1009-CR-505
Criminal. Affirms conviction of dealing in a schedule II controlled substance as a Class B felony. The admission of the laboratory report without letting Koenig confront the person who created it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt under Chapman v. California.
Opinions Sept. 20, 2010
Obed Kalwitz, Jr., et al. v. Eugene Kalwitz, et al.
46A03-0912-CV-574
Civil. Affirms small claims judgment in favor of siblings Eugene Kalwitz and Sharon Greiger in Obed Kalwitz Jr.’s suit alleging the siblings stole items from land that now belong to the siblings. Affirms ruling on counterclaim for $1,750 compensatory damages for abuse of process, $2,750 in punitive damages, and $900 in attorney’s fees. Obed and Rolene’s request for a change of judge was untimely, and their claim is barred by res judicata. Remands to the small claims court for a determination of the amount of appellate attorney’s fees and costs to which Eugene and Sharon are entitled.
Opinions Sept. 17, 2010
In the Matter of Kenneth E. Lauter
55S00-0906-DI-267
Discipline. A per curiam decision publicly reprimands attorney Kenneth E. Lauter of Morgan County because he didn’t indicate to the client what the additional retainer should be or how it would be determined, thus violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 1.5 (b) and (c).
Justices Brent Dickson and Robert Rucker dissented, believing that the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission did not prove a charged violation by clear and convincing evidence and that the hearing officer correctly found no violation and recommended a finding in favor of Lauter.
Opinions Sept. 16, 2010
Foundations
of East Chicago, Inc., Successor by Merger to East Chicago Community Development Foundation, Inc. and Twin City Education
Foundation, Inc. v. City of East Chicago
No. 49S02-0908-CV-00383
Civil. Justices granted a rehearing petition, holding that the city didn’t follow Indiana Appellate Rule 65(E) and
was premature in filing a motion at the trial court level before a previous appellate ruling was certified. Justices found
the trial court correctly denied the city’s request, and it kept intact its original opinion from May.
Opinions Sept. 15, 2010
Alexander Gatzimos, M.D. v. Boone County and State of Indiana
06A05-0911-CV-664
Civil. Grants the state’s motion to dismiss Dr. Gatzimos’ appeal of the trial court order denying his petition for expungement. Remands to the trial court to allow Gatzimos the opportunity to present admissible evidence as to whether his charges were dismissed because of mistaken identity; no offense was actually committed; or there was an absence of probable cause.
Opinions Sept. 14, 2010
Indiana Court of Appeals
Gerald
L. Wilkerson v. State of Indiana
26A01-0909-CR-457
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to suppress. Compliance with the Pirtle requirement (Pirtle
v. State, 323 N.E.2d 634 (Ind. 1975)) was unnecessary and consent to pat-down search was valid.
Opinions Sept. 13, 2010
Indiana Court of Appeals
Kevin
Moncrief v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1004-PC-245
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
Opinions Sept. 10, 2010
Joseph Finch, David E. Hensley, and Peter W. Mungovan v. Bart Peterson, individually and in his official capacity, et al.
09-2676
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch.
Civil. Affirms denial of the city officials’ motion for judgment on the pleadings in a suit filed by three white officers alleging discrimination in promotions. The 1978 consent decree between the Indianapolis Police Department and the U.S. Department of Justice does not operate to confer qualified immunity on city officials who were involved in making the challenged promotions. Nothing in the decree required them to take race into consideration when making promotions.
Opinions Sept. 9, 2010
Matter of the Estate of Harry L. Rickert
18S04-1002-CV-118
Civil. Reverses judgment in favor of Taylor, who was Rickert’s power of attorney, that she receive the money from accounts in which she was a joint holder. The presumption is that Taylor’s use of her power of attorney to benefit herself made those accounts invalid, and she failed to overcome that presumption to allow her to inherit the money. Remands with direction to order restoration to the estate of bank accounts owned of record by Rickert and Taylor that were created through use of Taylor’s power of attorney from Rickert and lacking any support documentation indicating participation by Rickert.
Opinions Sept. 8, 2010
Letecia D. Brown v. Automotive Components Holdings, LLC and Ford Motor Co.
09-1641
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Chief Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment dismissing Brown’s FMLA claim following her termination from Ford. The undisputed facts show Brown was absent without leave after failing to give proper FMLA notice for an extension of a previously requested leave period.
Opinions Sept. 7, 2010
David Hatter, et al. v. Pierce Manufacturing, Inc.
49A02-0907-CV-659
Civil. Affirms jury trial and verdict in favor of Pierce Manufacturing in the Hatters’ product liability action. Hatter failed to exhaust one of his peremptory challenges and has not shown both of his challenges for cause were improperly denied. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in the giving of jury instructions or in excluding evidence and did not err by denying Hatter’s partial motion for judgment on the evidence.
Opinions Sept. 3, 2010
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Trent
L. Chapin v. Fort-Rohr Motors Inc.
09-1347
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Civil. Reverses denial of Fort-Rohr’s motion for judgment as a matter of law after a jury found in Chapin’s favor
in his retaliation suit. Fort-Rohr was entitled to judgment as a matter of law because Chapin did not produce sufficient evidence
to support an actual or constructive discharge.
Opinions Sept. 2, 2010
Indiana Court of Appeals
Conwell
Construction v. Abbey Road Development, LLC, et al. (NFP)
49A05-0912-CV-741
Civil. Affirms trial court grant of permission to amend its counterclaim to assert a claim for actual damages.
Opinions Sept. 1, 2010
No. 45S03-1001-CV-33
Civil. Rules general negligence claims filed with the Indiana Department of Insurance can continue an action already filed in state court relating to medical malpractice issues.
Opinions Aug. 31, 2010
Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc. v. ACE American Insurance Co.
10-1073
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Chief Judge Philip P. Simon.
Civil. Affirms dismissal of diversity suit against insurer. ACE had no duty to provide Hayes Lemmerz International’s lawyers with legal advice and didn’t breach its duty to defend by failing to advise HLI that its law firm wasn’t defending the suit properly.
Opinions Aug. 30, 2010
United States of America v. Jennifer K. Howard
09-3840
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Criminal. Affirms convictions of wire fraud and mail fraud. Holds that even if an indictment names particular victims, the government need not prove intent to harm those named victims. The government proved that Howard intended to defraud the scheme’s victims, and such intent was established by examining the circumstances of the scheme, not by who was specifically named in the indictment.
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
Longest-practicing female attorney in Indiana has no plans to retire
-
Criminal code and expungement bills signed by governor
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
SCOTUS rules against Indiana farmer in seed patent case
-
Social media sleuths find evidence, but admissibility requires authentication
Court Calendar
-
May 24, 2013 Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Judy Holcomb, Personal Representative of the Estate of Mable Louise Cochran, deceased - 5/24/13
-
May 28, 2013 The Estate of Richard A. Mayer and Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C., v. Lax, Inc., and David Lasco - 5/28/13
-
June 12, 2013 Northern Assurance Company of America v. Thomson, Inc., et al. - 6/12/13
-
June 18, 2013 State of Indiana v. Robert Owens - 6/18/13
Back to Top
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.