ILNews

Opinions April 10, 2014

April 10, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
HRC Hotels, LLC v. Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II of Marion County, Indiana, Jeffrey R. Baumgarth and The Myers Y. Cooper Company
49A04-1307-PL-313
Civil plenary. Reverses dismissal of HRC Hotels’ amended petition for judicial review, which substituted I-465 LLC as the real party in interest instead of HRC Hotels. The standing requirements under I.C. 36-7-4-1603 are procedural rather than jurisdictional, so HRC Hotels’ alleged lack of standing when the petition was filed does not deprive the trial court of subject-matter jurisdiction. It should substitute I-465 LLC as a real party in interest and hear the merits of the petition for judicial review. Remands for further proceedings.

Michael Johnson v. State of Indiana
49A02-1307-CR-562
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony criminal confinement, Class B felony rape, Class C felony battery, Class D felonies intimidation and strangulation, and Class A misdemeanor interfering with the reporting of a crime. Johnson knowing, voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial on all of his charges, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying him the right to cross-examine the victim about past sexual conduct, and the state presented sufficient evidence to prove Johnson committed Class B felony rape and Class D felony intimidation. Judge Bradford concurs in result.

Monterius D. Sharp v. State of Indiana (NFP)
05A02-1306-CR-522
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for Class C felony escape, Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun and three counts of Class D felony intimidation.

Dawayne J. Thomas v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1309-CR-452
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

John Orville Study v. State of Indiana (NFP)
06A04-1308-CR-391
Criminal. Affirms convictions of four counts of Class B felony robbery, six counts of Class B felony criminal confinement, one count of Class D felony resisting law enforcement, one count of Class D felony pointing a firearm and one count of Class D felony auto theft.

Adam W. Powell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
38A02-1304-IF-316
Infraction. Affirms finding Powell committed Class A infraction operating a motor vehicle without financial responsibility, Class A infraction driving while suspended, Class C infraction failure to register and Class C infraction window tint in violation by a driver.

Jamie L. Strickler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A02-1308-CR-707
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to three counts of Class B felony dealing in a controlled substance under two different cause numbers.  

Richard Brown and Janet Brown v. City of Valparaiso, Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1308-PL-332
Civil plenary. Affirms order denying the Browns’ inverse condemnation claim on the merits.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  2. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  3. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  4. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT