ILNews

Opinions April 25, 2012

April 25, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Emilio Martino v. Western & Southern Financial Group
12-1855
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Western & Southern Financial Group on Martino’s lawsuit for religious discrimination and defamation. Martino’s evidence neither calls into doubt W&S’s explanation for his discharge – that he did not provide documents verifying his eligibility for employment in the U.S. – nor establishes a prima facie case of defamation.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Martin Meehan v. State of Indiana
71A04-1209-CR-453
Criminal. Reverses Class C felony burglary conviction and resulting habitual offender enhancement because there is no evidence that would support an inference that Meehan’s DNA was found on a glove because he handled it during the burglary, as opposed to some other time.

James Edwin Goris v. State of Indiana (NFP)

87A01-1209-CR-442
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalence between 0.08 and 0.15, and Class C infraction failure to obey a stop sign at a through highway.

Walter Fisk v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1208-CR-646
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor battery and Class B misdemeanor unauthorized entry of a motorized vehicle.

Antonio A. Burgos, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1209-CR-461
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of marijuana.

Charles E. Justise, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1209-PC-736
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Jessica and Gerson Urbina v. Tina Klinkose-Kyler, Laronda Southworth and A Bond of Life Adoptions, LLC (NFP)

06A01-1210-CT-464
Civil tort. Reverses dismissal of the Urbinas’ lawsuit against ABLA for damages in a failed adoption process. Remands for reinstatement of the complaint.

Richard J. Bond v. Knox County Drainage Board and Dick Vermillion, As Knox County Surveyor (NFP)
42A01-1209-PL-422
Civil plenary. Affirms dismissal of Bond’s petition for judicial review for failure to state a claim.

Brenda Varo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1203-CR-144
Criminal. Grants rehearing to address an issue raised in Varo’s appeal on a jury instruction on criminal gang activity, but that the error, if any, was waived. Reaffirms original decision.

E. Paul Haste v. State of Indiana (NFP)
03A05-1207-CR-378
Criminal. Grants state’s petition for rehearing, vacates the portion of opinion denying a hearing on restitution and remands for a new hearing on restitution.

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

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. 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!!!

  3. 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?

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT