ILNews

Opinions April 23, 2012

April 23, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Richard Leggs v. State of Indiana
49A02-1105-CR-522
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentences for one count of Class B felony criminal confinement and one count each of Class C felony intimidation, Class C felony criminal recklessness, and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. Reverses one count of Class B felony criminal confinement, due to the continuing crime doctrine and remands for resentencing.

Nathan Abernathy v. Larry Bertram and Keith Broyles
33A04-1106-CC-317
Civil collection. Affirms trial court’s decision to omit the value of Abernathy’s crop insurance policy in the amount of damages it ordered Broyles to pay. Holds the trial court did not err when it denied Abernathy’s conversion claim because he did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Broyles and Bertram intended to exercise unauthorized control over Abernathy’s property.

Omni Insurance Group v. Lake Poage, Tonya Poage, Cody Bauer, Jill Bauer, Gary Bauer, and Allstate Insurance Company
92A03-1105-CT-208
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment in favor of the appellees, holding that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether a teen was a resident of his mother’s household at the time of a crash and insured under her auto policy. Remands for trial.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of K.L.; P.L. (Father) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A04-1110-JT-625
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Michael Rimschneider v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A05-1105-CR-414
Criminal. Affirms denial of request to withdraw guilty plea.

Rodney D. Bledsoe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1105-CR-442
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated, Class C infraction driving left of center, Class D felony possession of cocaine, and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

John A. Hawkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1108-PC-424
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

In Re: The Marriage of Brenda S. Sanders and Paul R. Sanders, Paul R. Sanders v. Brenda S. Sanders (NFP)
76A03-1107-DR-398
Domestic relation. Affirms division of marital property and denies Brenda Sanders’ request for appellate attorney fees.

Jamal Rasheed Southern v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1107-CR-298
Criminal. Affirms denial of request for credit time.

In Re: The Marriage of Noelle Christine Green and Prentiss Lamont Green; Noelle Christine Green v. Prentiss Lamont Green (NFP)
49A02-1110-DR-932
Domestic relation. Dismisses appeal of magistrate’s entry regarding child support modification.

LBJA Investments, LLC v. Brian Kamuf and William K. Saalwaechter (NFP)
74A05-1105-PL-307
Civil plenary. Affirms court’s striking of portions of LBJA Investments’ motion for summary judgment, denial of its motion for summary judgment and grant of summary judgment in favor of Saalwaechter.

Alan Dwayne Gray v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1110-CR-517
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies criminal recklessness and intimidation.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of A.K., F.C. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
57A03-1108-JT-374
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

 

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. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. 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?

ADVERTISEMENT