ILNews

Opinions April 15, 2013

April 15, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Friday:
Hamilton County Assessor v. Allisonville Road Development, LLC
49T10-1204-TA-30
Tax.  Affirms Indiana Board of Tax Review’s decision to reduce the assessment of former farm land purchased for redevelopment after finding a previous assessment as commercial land was in error.  The assessor claimed that the board used the wrong version of I.C. 6-1.1-4-12 when it awarded the property the “developer’s discount” for 2002, and that the board erred in determining that the cessation of farming activities was not a “change in use” under the statute.

Monday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

Jose Guzman v. State of Indiana
54A01-1209-CR-409
Criminal. Affirms eight-year sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony reckless homicide and the order Guzman pay restitution to the accident victims. The trial court acted within its discretion in ordering the restitution and in sentencing Guzman, and his sentence is not inappropriate.

Serenity Springs, et al. v. The LaPorte County Convention and Visitors Bureau
46A03-1205-MI-214
Miscellaneous. Reverses order permanently enjoining hotel-resort owner Serenity Springs from using the designation “Visit Michigan City LaPorte” and the order Serenity transfer the domain name registration to the LaPorte County Convention and Visitors Bureau. The bureau did not establish that Serenity committed trademark infringement or cybersquatting because it failed to establish that it held a valid and protectable trademark in the designation “Visit Michigan City LaPorte.” Remands with instructions to consider the bureau’s remaining claims. Denies the bureau’s request for appellate attorney fees.

John Roberts v. Stephen Buennagel and Allstate Insurance Company (NFP)
41A01-1206-CT-257
Civil tort. Affirms denial of Roberts’ motion to correct errors following a jury verdict in favor of Buennagel and Allstate on Roberts’ negligence complaint stemming from a car accident.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I'm not sure what's more depressing: the fact that people would pay $35,000 per year to attend an unaccredited law school, or the fact that the same people "are hanging in there and willing to follow the dean’s lead in going forward" after the same school fails to gain accreditation, rendering their $70,000 and counting education worthless. Maybe it's a good thing these people can't sit for the bar.

  2. Such is not uncommon on law school startups. Students and faculty should tap Bruce Green, city attorney of Lufkin, Texas. He led a group of studnets and faculty and sued the ABA as a law student. He knows the ropes, has advised other law school startups. Very astute and principled attorney of unpopular clients, at least in his past, before Lufkin tapped him to run their show.

  3. Not that having the appellate records on Odyssey won't be welcome or useful, but I would rather they first bring in the stray counties that aren't yet connected on the trial court level.

  4. Aristotle said 350 bc: "The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.

  5. Oh yes, lifetime tenure. The Founders gave that to the federal judges .... at that time no federal district courts existed .... so we are talking the Supreme Court justices only in context ....so that they could rule against traditional marriage and for the other pet projects of the sixties generation. Right. Hmmmm, but I must admit, there is something from that time frame that seems to recommend itself in this context ..... on yes, from a document the Founders penned in 1776: " He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."

ADVERTISEMENT