ILNews

Opinions April 14, 2014

April 14, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Friday:
In the Matter of: Anonymous
45S00-1301-DI-33
Discipline. Issues private reprimand to Lake County attorney who engaged in misconduct by making false or misleading communications regarding legal services and failing to include an office address in public communication. Respondent must pay $250 fee and one-half of the costs and expenses of this proceeding.

Monday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

Ball State University v. Jennifer Irons, In re the Marriage of: Jennifer Irons, Wife, and Scott Irons, Husband
45A03-1307-DR-296
Domestic relation. Dismisses Ball State’s appeal of the order to release the college transcript of Jennifer Irons’ child. This appeal was not properly brought under Appellate Rule 14(A)(3). Denies Jennifer Irons’ request for appellate attorney fees. Judge Brown concurs in part and dissents in part.

Paula Rorer (Hubbard) v. William Shane Rorer (NFP)
87A04-1310-DR-494
Domestic relation. Affirms finding of indirect contempt against Hubbard in post-dissolution proceedings.

In re the Marriage of: Annette M. Huseman, f/k/a Annette M. Mantis v. Angelo N. Mantis (NFP)
45A04-1307-DR-351
Domestic relation. Reverses the trial court’s order denying mother’s motion to correct errors and the court’s April 23, 2013, order related to father’s total arrearage and the additional weekly amount he must pay toward his arrearage. Affirms the phase-in schedule of father’s modified support payments, and remands for proceedings consistent with this opinion. Judge Robb dissents.

Tyrone A. Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1309-PC-787
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Jeremy J. Holden v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1308-CR-436
Criminal. Affirms 10-year sentence for Class B felony armed robbery.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: J.J. and A.J. (Minor Children) and S.J. (Father) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A04-1309-JT-465
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Donald William Myers, III v. State of Indiana (NFP)
76A03-1305-CR-173
Criminal. Reverses Myers’ four convictions of Class A felony attempted murder.

Jay Darland and Kathleen Darland v. Elizabeth Rupp (NFP)
06A04-1308-PL-403
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment in favor of Rupp on the Darlands’ complaint seeking damages arising from a car accident.

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. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT