Opinions

Opinions Sept. 23, 2016

September 23, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re: The Adoption of: J.S.S. and K.N.S., Rayburn and Beth Robinson v. M.R.S.
02A04-1603-AD-545
Adoption. Affirms trial court’s decision to deny B.R. and R.R.’s motion to correct error after the trial court found that they had not established clear and convincing evidence necessary to dispense with parental consent. B.R. and R.R., foster parents, had petitioned to adopt J.S.S. and K.N.S. without the consent of their father, M.S.
More

Opinions Sept. 22, 2016

September 22, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Darwick Young v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1602-CR-216
Criminal. Affirms Darwick Young’s conviction for Level 2 felony dealing in cocaine, Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license, Level 6 felony maintaining a common nuisance and Class B misdemeanor possession of marijuana. Remands with instructions to vacate Young’s Level 3 felony possession of cocaine conviction and to revise his sentence.
More

Opinions Sept. 21, 2016

September 21, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Andre C. Coleman v. State of Indiana
49A02-1511-CR-1999
Criminal. Vacates imposition of supplemental public defender and probation fees against Andre Coleman. Remands for further proceedings.
More

Opinions Sept. 20, 2016

September 20, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Christina Schermerhorn v. State of Indiana
49A02-1510-CR-1643
Criminal. Affirms Christina Schermerhorn’s convictions of criminal recklessness, a Class A misdemeanor, and domestic battery, a Class A misdemeanor.

More

Opinions Sept. 16, 2016

September 16, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Bradley Starr by Next Friend Heather Starr-Haller and Heather Starr-Haller v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Company and the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles
32A05-1605-PL-976
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for State Farm on Starr-Haller’s complaint seeking coverage for an auto accident. State Farm did not waive its right to deny Starr-Haller the coverage she now claims for an accident that occurred after her coverage had lapsed.
More

Opinions Sept. 15, 2016

September 15, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Mindy M. Cline v. State of Indiana
38A04-1512-XP-2221
Expungement petition. Reverses and remands denial of Mindy Cline’s petition for expungement, finding trial court abused its discretion in denying her petition. Judge Michael Barnes dissents with separate opinion.
More

Opinions Sept. 14, 2016

September 14, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Meridian Health Services Corporation v. Thomas Martin Bell

71A04-1511-DR-2005
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s order finding Meridian Health Services Corporation in contempt of court for failure to comply with a subpoena duces tecum and appear at a deposition and awarding attorney fees as a sanction. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding Meridian in contempt.
More

Opinions Sept. 13, 2016

September 13, 2016
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
William Hinesley, III v. Wendy Knight, superintendent, Correctional Industrial Facility

15-2122
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Jane E. Magnus?Stinson, Judge.
Civil. Affirms district court’s decision to deny William Hinesley’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. Finds that Hinesley’s counsel was not ineffective in a prejudicial manner.
More

Opinions Sept. 12, 2016

September 12, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Marc Lindsey v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
20A03-1508-CR-1086
Criminal. Affirms Marc Lindsey’s conviction of Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated.
More

Opinions Sept. 9, 2016

September 9, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Julie R. Waterfield v. Richard D. Waterfield
92A03-1511-PL-1968
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s order denying Julie R. Waterford’s request to set aside her divorce decree entered in 1997 based on the allegation of fraud committed by Richard D. Waterfield while negotiating a settlement leading to the dissolution of the marriage. Finds that Julie Waterfield failed to establish that Richard Waterfield committed fraud. Finds that Richard Waterfield is entitled to an award of attorney fees.
More

Opinions Sept. 8, 2016

September 8, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Thomas A. Carpenter, et al. v. The Cincinnati Specialty Underwriters Insurance Company
33A01-1602-CT-265
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment and declaratory judgment in favor of Cincinnati Specialty. It had no obligation to make payments under a consent judgment in which Carpenter and Cincinnati’s insured, Lovell’s Lounge, agreed Carpenter’s injuries were caused by Lovell’s Lounge’s negligence or that Lovell’s was vicariously liable for injuries Carpenter sustained when he was punched in the jaw by patron Jerry Dean Johnson. Finds the consent judgment was obtained by bad faith or collusion, collateral estoppel does not apply, and CSU is not bound by the consent judgment.
More

Opinions Sept. 7, 2016

September 7, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of: J.B., A Child in Need of Services: S.M. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
47A01-1604-JC-765
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms J.B.’s designation as a child in need of services.
More

Opinions Sept. 6, 2016

September 6, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Brian W. Ellison v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
92A05-1604-CR-964
Criminal. Affirms Ellison’s designation as a credit-restricted felon. Finds sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s determination that Ellison molested A.E. on or after July 1, 2008, the effective date of the credit-restricted felon statute.
More

Opinions Sept. 2, 2016

September 2, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Commitment of H.F. v. Eskenazi Health/Midtown Clinic (mem. dec.)
49A02-1602-MH-335
Mental health. Affirms order for temporary involuntary civil commitment, not to exceed 90 days. 
More

Opinions Sept. 1, 2016

September 1, 2016
Indiana Supreme Court
In the Matter of: Harold E. Bean
49S00-1601-DI-2
Discipline. Disbars Bean for engaging in attorney misconduct while the elected clerk-treasurer of the town of Warren Park. He pleaded guilty to theft and official misconduct as Class D felonies after writing dozens of checks to himself from town funds.
More

Opinions Aug. 31, 2016

August 31, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
George P. Broadbent, and Plainfield Village, LP v. Fifth Third Bank
32A01-1602-MF-345
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms summary judgment for the bank. The trial court properly interpreted the guaranties of the contract and applied the guaranties’ terms to calculate Broadbent’s liability.
More

Opinions Aug. 30, 2016

August 30, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
In re the Paternity of: L.S., Chen Su v. James Lowe (mem. dec.)
49A02-1512-JP-2196
Juvenile. Affirms order modifying custody of L.S. to sole legal custody of father, parenting time and child support.
More

Opinions Aug. 29, 2016

August 29, 2016
Indiana Supreme Court
Michael Day v. State of Indiana
24S05-1606-CR-358
Criminal. Affirms Day’s disorderly conduct conviction. Concludes that the “fighting” subsection of the disorderly conduct statute does not contain a public disturbance element but does require a physical altercation. His intentional spitting provided sufficient evidence of a physical altercation.
More

Opinions Aug. 26, 2016

August 26, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Dorothy Williams v. State of Indiana
46A03-1511-CR-1913
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct. Finds the state’s impairment of Williams’ speech was constitutional because it was rational and her speech was politically ambiguous for purposes of an Article I, Section 9 affirmative defense.
More

Opinions Aug. 25, 2016

August 25, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
In re the Scott David Hurwich 1986 Irrevocable Trust Scott D. Hurwich v. Stacey R. MacDonald
71A03-1602-TR-301
Trust. Reverses the probate court’s order dismissing Hurwich’s complaint. Hurwich’s appeal was timely filed and dismissal of his complaint was not appropriate. Specific factual support is not required under Indiana Trial Rule 8(A) as factual specifics may not be available until discovery is made.
More

Opinions Aug. 24, 2016

August 24, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Christopher Compton v. State of Indiana
82A01-1511-CR-1997
Criminal. Affirms conviction of three counts of felony murder and the finding that Compton is a habitual offender. The trial court did not deprive Compton of due process when it allowed the media to tweet live updates of his trial from the courtroom, nor did it err in admitting evidence of Compton’s incriminatory statements. Calls for guidance on social media use during criminal trials.
More

Opinions Aug. 23, 2016

August 23, 2016

Indiana Supreme Court
Kristy Burnell v. State of Indiana
29S02-1512-CR-707
Criminal. Affirms trial court decision to not terminate license suspension. Holds a refusal to submit to a chemical test occurs when the conduct of the motorist is such that a reasonable person in the officer’s position would be justified in believing the motorist was capable of refusal and manifested an unwillingness to submit to the test. Burnell has the burden of demonstrating the evidence shows her license suspension by the BMV should be overturned, and she did not carry this burden.

More

Opinions Aug. 22, 2016

August 22, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Douglas M. Curtis v. State of Indiana
49A02-1512-CR-2293
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass. Because the apartment complex where Curtis had been living with his father provided him a 48-hour grace period to remove his property and Curtis was arrested while in the process of gathering his personal belongings, there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction.
More

Opinions Aug. 19, 2016

August 19, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
Amir Basic and Gerard Arthus v. Numan A. Amouri, Mohamad H. Mohajeri, Mohammad Aslam Chaudhry, Adnan Khan, Imdad Zackariya, Mohammad Sirajuddin, Sarah Shaikh, Aijaz Shaikh, Ismail Al-Ani, et al.
71A03-1510-PL-1820
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court findings that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, appellants lacked standing and its decision to quash certain subpoenas in a dispute brought against the imam of the Islamic Society of Michiana Inc., by a Amir Basic, a member of the board of directors and trustees, after he was removed. Finds Basic and Gerard Arthus acted in procedural bad faith. Grants appellees’ request for damages and remands to the trial court for a determination of those damages.
More

Opinions Aug. 18, 2016

August 18, 2016
Indiana Court of Appeals
J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., and Terry L. Brown, Jr. v. The Guardianship of Kristen Zak
45A03-1506-CT-670
Civil tort. Affirms jury verdict in favor of the guardianship of Kristen Zak on the guardianship’s negligence claim. Zak’s vehicle slid on snowy conditions on I-65 and crashed into a J.B. Hunt semi that had jackknifed an hour prior. Finds there were multiple questions of fact that needed to be answered by a jury and there is no basis on which to second-guess the jury. There are also no questions of law warranting reversal.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It really doesn't matter what the law IS, if law enforcement refuses to take reports (or take them seriously), if courts refuse to allow unrepresented parties to speak (especially in Small Claims, which is supposedly "informal"). It doesn't matter what the law IS, if constituents are unable to make effective contact or receive any meaningful response from their representatives. Two of our pets were unnecessarily killed; court records reflect that I "abandoned" them. Not so; when I was denied one of them (and my possessions, which by court order I was supposed to be able to remove), I went directly to the court. And earlier, when I tried to have the DV PO extended (it expired while the subject was on probation for violating it), the court denied any extension. The result? Same problems, less than eight hours after expiration. Ironic that the county sheriff was charged (and later pleaded to) with intimidation, but none of his officers seemed interested or capable of taking such a report from a private citizen. When I learned from one officer what I needed to do, I forwarded audio and transcript of one occurrence and my call to law enforcement (before the statute of limitations expired) to the prosecutor's office. I didn't even receive an acknowledgement. Earlier, I'd gone in to the prosecutor's office and been told that the officer's (written) report didn't match what I said occurred. Since I had the audio, I can only say that I have very little faith in Indiana government or law enforcement.

  2. One can only wonder whether Mr. Kimmel was paid for his work by Mr. Burgh ... or whether that bill fell to the citizens of Indiana, many of whom cannot afford attorneys for important matters. It really doesn't take a judge(s) to know that "pavement" can be considered a deadly weapon. It only takes a brain and some education or thought. I'm glad to see the conviction was upheld although sorry to see that the asphalt could even be considered "an issue".

  3. In response to bryanjbrown: thank you for your comment. I am familiar with Paul Ogden (and applaud his assistance to Shirley Justice) and have read of Gary Welsh's (strange) death (and have visited his blog on many occasions). I am not familiar with you (yet). I lived in Kosciusko county, where the sheriff was just removed after pleading in what seems a very "sweetheart" deal. Unfortunately, something NEEDS to change since the attorneys won't (en masse) stand up for ethics (rather making a show to please the "rules" and apparently the judges). I read that many attorneys are underemployed. Seems wisdom would be to cull the herd and get rid of the rotting apples in practice and on the bench, for everyone's sake as well as justice. I'd like to file an attorney complaint, but I have little faith in anything (other than the most flagrant and obvious) resulting in action. My own belief is that if this was medicine, there'd be maimed and injured all over and the carnage caused by "the profession" would be difficult to hide. One can dream ... meanwhile, back to figuring out to file a pro se "motion to dismiss" as well as another court required paper that Indiana is so fond of providing NO resources for (unlike many other states, who don't automatically assume that citizens involved in the court process are scumbags) so that maybe I can get the family law attorney - whose work left me with no settlement, no possessions and resulted in the death of two pets (etc ad nauseum) - to stop abusing the proceedings supplemental and small claims rules and using it as a vehicle for harassment and apparently, amusement.

  4. Been on social security sense sept 2011 2massive strokes open heart surgery and serious ovarian cancer and a blood clot in my lung all in 14 months. Got a letter in may saying that i didn't qualify and it was in form like i just applied ,called social security she said it don't make sense and you are still geting a check in june and i did ,now i get a check from my part D asking for payment for july because there will be no money for my membership, call my prescription coverage part D and confirmed no check will be there.went to social security they didn't want to answer whats going on just said i should of never been on it .no one knows where this letter came from was California im in virginia and been here sense my strokes and vcu filed for my disability i was in the hospital when they did it .It's like it was a error . My ,mothers social security was being handled in that office in California my sister was dealing with it and it had my social security number because she died last year and this letter came out of the same office and it came at the same time i got the letter for my mother benefits for death and they had the same date of being typed just one was on the mail Saturday and one on Monday. . I think it's a mistake and it should been fixed instead there just getting rid of me .i never got a formal letter saying when i was being tsken off.

  5. Employers should not have racially discriminating mind set. It has huge impact on the society what the big players do or don't do in the industry. Background check is conducted just to verify whether information provided by the prospective employee is correct or not. It doesn't have any direct combination with the rejection of the employees. If there is rejection, there should be something effective and full-proof things on the table that may keep the company or the people associated with it in jeopardy.

ADVERTISEMENT