ILNews

Opinions April 18, 2012

April 18, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Todd Walters and Matenia Walters v. Aaron Austin and Herman & Goetz, Inc.
20A04-1106-CT-342
Civil tort. Dismisses the Walterses’ appeal of the judgment on a jury verdict in favor of Austin and his employer on the Walterses’ complaint for damages arising from a multi-vehicle accident. The appellate court does not have jurisdiction. Judge Darden dissents.

Alebro, LLC v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Jason Scheidell
93A02-1110-EX-970
Agency appeal. Reverses grant of unemployment benefits to terminated employee Scheidell. Holds that if an employee’s explanation for the behavior that led to his termination is another terminable offense, that provides just cause for termination.

In Re the Adoption of K.B.M. and L.B.M.; T.M. v. R.P.F. (NFP)
39A01-1109-AD-423
Adoption. Affirms decision that biological father T.M.’s consent to the adoption by stepfather R.P.F. was not required.

In Re the Paternity of K.S.; J.S. v. M.M. (NFP)
17A03-1109-JP-438
Juvenile. Affirms trial court decision to continue joint legal custody, but reverses modification of primary physical custody to mother. Remands with instructions to enter an order addressing father’s contentions as to mother’s failure to pay costs. Judge Riley concurs in part, dissents in part, and would remand for sole legal custody to be awarded to either mother or father.

Chad Jeremy Orme v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1105-CR-233
Criminal. Reverses revocation of probation and sentence imposed.

Justin A. Staples v. State of Indiana (NFP)
90A04-1109-CR-490
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony aiding, inducing or causing theft.

Margaret M. Hammond v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Porter County Commissioners (NFP)
93A02-1110-EX-956
Agency appeal. Affirms Hammond is ineligible for unemployment benefits.

Dennis Mikel v. State of Indiana (NFP)
52A04-1111-SC-598
Small claim. Affirms the trial court did not err in denying Mikel’s request for appointed counsel or in not conducting a jury trial on his complaint. The trial court erred in entering judgment in favor of the defendants. Reverses and remands for an assessment of damages.

Ramon Crawford v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1108-CR-728
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and imposition of previously suspended portion of sentence.

Jason Myers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A02-1105-CR-598
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony battery resulting in serious bodily injury and Class B felony aggravated battery.

Huntington Copper, LLC v. Conner Sawmill, Inc. (NFP)
09A02-1110-PL-917
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of Huntington Copper’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Derrick Mays v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1107-CR-669
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony robbery, Class D felony criminal recklessness and Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license.

Ronald Edward Madison, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1110-CR-597
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of cocaine.

Brandon Ray Carter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1108-CR-379
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery causing serious bodily injury.

Jason A. Reber v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A04-1107-CR-408
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery and Class A misdemeanor interference with reporting a crime.

Michael Jackson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1112-CR-669
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  2. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  3. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  4. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  5. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

ADVERTISEMENT