ILNews

Opinions Aug. 4, 2010

August 4, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Wells Fargo Insurance v. Bruce A. Land

48A02-0911-CV-1099
Civil. Affirms Land is entitled to commission on all of his 2005 crop-year policies. By Feb. 2, 2006, the date of Land’s resignation, the sales had been consummated, and his right to the 2005 crop-year commissions had fully accrued, subject only to receipt of the premium payments. The trial court erred by not deducting the amount Land received as commission from JS Crop for his 2005 crop-insurance sales and by allowing him to keep $6,000 paid to him in draw in 2006 because it would be a windfall he’s not entitled to. Land is entitled to attorney fees and appellate attorney fees attributable to his recovery of unpaid wages. Remands with instructions.

Justin Davis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1001-CR-6
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder, two counts of Class C felony robbery, Class C felony attempted robbery, and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Aaron D. Ellis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1001-CR-56
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass.

Jason T. Fabini v. Joanne M. Fabini (NFP)
02A03-1003-DR-152
Domestic relation. Affirms order granting Jason Fabini’s motion to modify child support.

Edward Ray Kind v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1003-CR-291
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class A felony dealing in cocaine, one count of Class A felony possession of cocaine, and one count of Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance.

Robert L. Terry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0910-CR-993
Criminal. Grants petition for rehearing for the sole purpose of remanding the case to the trial court for clarification on whether the trial court’s order to suspended Terry’s driving privileges for a fixed period of two years and 90 days was contrary to law.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT