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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. I totally agree with John Smith.

  5. An idea that would harm the public good which is protected by licensing. Might as well abolish doctor and health care professions licensing too. Ridiculous. Unrealistic. Would open the floodgates of mischief and abuse. Even veteranarians are licensed. How has deregulation served the public good in banking, for example? Enough ideology already!

ADVERTISEMENT