ILNews

Opinions April 24, 2012

April 24, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

George Clements v. Kimberly Hall and Stanley Harmon
06A04-1106-MI-282
Miscellaneous. Reverses trial court’s award of summary judgment for Kimberly Hall and Stanley Harmon, holding their attorney failed to notify George Clements and his attorney that a motion had been filed. Remands for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

Shawn A. Keckler, Kari Felda, Special Admin. to the Estate of Ryan S. Holloway, Janice Norman, Dewayne Scott, Timothy J. Boganwright, et al. v. Meridian Security Insurance Company

43A03-1112-PL-551
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Meridian Security Insurance Company, holding the company failed to prove that a driver who caused a fatal crash had violated an exclusionary clause in the policy. Holds that failing to pay for claims arising from the crash would have drastic consequences for those injured and killed in the crash, and remands for further proceedings.

Delbert Conklin v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Carter Express, Inc.
93A02-1109-EX-864
Civil. Reverses finding that Delbert Conklin was not entitled to unemployment benefits because of his momentary loss of consciousness that caused him to veer off the road and damage the truck he was driving for Carter Express, and its contents. Holds that no evidence suggests Conklin is to blame for that incident and he therefore did not breach a duty to Carter and should receive unemployment benefits.

Michael L. Crowe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
89A01-1108-CR-420
Criminal. Affirms sentences for two counts of Class C felony forgery, one count of Class D felony receiving stolen property and Class D felony theft.

Harold W. Reynolds v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1109-CR-468
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s order that Harold Reynolds serve the remaining 12 months of his previously suspended sentence for violation of his work release requirements.

Releford Green, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1107-CR-320
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony domestic battery; reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery on double jeopardy grounds and remands with instruction that the trial court vacate the conviction and sentence on that count.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of M.B., D.B., and D.S.; M.B. (Mother) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
30A04-1110-JT-554
Juvenile. Affirms termination of mother’s parental rights.

In Re The Marriage of: Leanne Kathleen Johnson v. Florenzo Johnson (NFP)
49A02-1109-DR-852
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s grant of father’s petition to modify joint legal custody, awarding full custody of two children to father.

Indiana Supreme Court accepted no cases on transfer for the week ending April 20.
 

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. 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?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT