ILNews

Opinions April 25, 2012

April 25, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

John Ludack v. State of Indiana
49A02-1109-CR-930
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and aggregate 130-year sentence for two counts of Class A felony child molesting and being a habitual offender. Defense counsel, by first asking the detective whether Ludack had admitted the allegations of child molestation during the interview, opened the door to the detective’s testimony that Ludack neither admitted nor denied the allegations of child molesting and just asked to stop speaking. Ludack also failed to prove his sentence is inappropriate.

The Kroger Co. v. WC Associates, LLC, as successor in interest to Metro Acquisitions, LLC
49A05-1108-PL-412
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment to WC Associates on its breach of contract claim against Kroger over its modifications of a sign and the trial court properly granted WC’s request for sanctions. Reverses summary judgment on WC’s claims of criminal mischief, criminal trespass and criminal conversion. Kroger did not have criminal intent when it modified the sign pylon. Grants WC’s request for appellate attorney fees only relating to the breach of contract claim. Remands for further proceedings.

D.M. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1109-JV-885
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent child for carrying a handgun without a license, a Class A misdemeanor if committed by an adult.

Clarence Moore v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1109-CR-496
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Abraham Patterson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1110-CR-1005
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

Marsha Spurr v. Robert Spurr (NFP)
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2012/april/04251201lmb.pdf
29A04-1108-DR-416
Domestic relation. Reverses denial of Marsha Spurr’s motion to correct error, which challenged the dissolution court’s order determining that daughter, S.S., was emancipated for purposes of determining child support owed by Robert Spurr. Chief Judge Robb dissents. Remands for further proceedings.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

  2. Mr. Straw, I hope you prevail in the fight. Please show us fellow American's that there is a way to fight the corrupted justice system and make them an example that you and others will not be treated unfairly. I hope you the best and good luck....

  3. @ President Snow - Nah, why try to fix something that ain't broken??? You do make an excellent point. I am sure some Mickey or Minnie Mouse will take Ruckers seat, I wonder how his retirement planning is coming along???

  4. Can someone please explain why Judge Barnes, Judge Mathias and Chief Judge Vaidik thought it was OK to re weigh the evidence blatantly knowing that by doing so was against the rules and went ahead and voted in favor of the father? I would love to ask them WHY??? I would also like to ask the three Supreme Justices why they thought it was OK too.

  5. How nice, on the day of my car accident on the way to work at the Indiana Supreme Court. Unlike the others, I did not steal any money or do ANYTHING unethical whatsoever. I am suing the Indiana Supreme Court and appealed the failure of the district court in SDIN to protect me. I am suing the federal judge because she failed to protect me and her abandonment of jurisdiction leaves her open to lawsuits because she stripped herself of immunity. I am a candidate for Indiana Supreme Court justice, and they imposed just enough sanction so that I am made ineligible. I am asking the 7th Circuit to remove all of them and appoint me as the new Chief Justice of Indiana. That's what they get for dishonoring my sacrifice and and violating the ADA in about 50 different ways.

ADVERTISEMENT