ILNews

Opinions April 26, 2011

April 26, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Wachovia Financial Services, Inc. v. Dune Harbor, LLC, et al.
64A03-1008-MF-415
Mortgage foreclosure. Reverses summary judgment order that a vendor lien was created in favor of and in force for Lefty’s Co-Ho Landing when Wachovia recorded its mortgages, stating that a genuine issue of material fact remains as to whether the lien, if created, was in force. Remands for further proceedings.

Lola Austin v. Indiana Family and Social Services Administration
64A04-1008-MI-514
Miscellaneous. Affirms trial court’s affirmance of Family and Social Services Administration’s imposition of transfer penalty upon Lola Austin’s application for Medicaid nursing home benefits, based upon Austin’s payment of $35,500 to her nephew and his wife, James and Julianne Mack, prior to applying for Medicaid nursing home benefits.

Michael D. Bennett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
33A04-1010-CR-658
Criminal. Affirms sentences for Class D felony resisting law enforcement and Class A misdemeanor driving while suspended.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of D.W., et al.; A.W. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
49A02-1009-JT-1076
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Antonio Dallas Jenkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
68A01-1008-CR-417
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony dealing in a Schedule III controlled substance.

Timothy Robertson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1008-CR-928
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation and ordering that Timothy Robertson serve two years of his previously suspended sentence.

Earl Wilson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1006-PC-305
Post conviction relief petition. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Lyle Tucker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
60A01-1010-CR-569
Criminal. Dismisses as moot Lyle Tucker’s appeal, as Tucker has already served the executed portion of his sentence.

Anthony Scott v. Saundra L. Walden (NFP)
29A05-1004-PL-250
Civil plenary. Affirms order dividing property between Anthony Scott and Saundra Walden and denies Walden’s request for appellate attorney fees.

Jeremiah Farmer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1005-CR-231
Criminal. Affirms aggregate 20-year sentence for one count of Class B felony robbery and one count of Class B felony burglary.

Marvin Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1007-CR-371
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony battery to a law enforcement officer.

Matter of the Supervised Estate of Mary Mikels (NFP)
36A05-1006-ES-429
Estate, supervised. Affirms order authorizing Jackson County Bank, the personal representative of the estate of Mary Mikels, to sell real property, pay claims, and close the estate.

Walter Wayne Bowles v. Terri E. Bowles (NFP)
30A01-1012-DR-620
Domestic relation. Reverses trial court’s order granting wife’s motion to correct error.

Company v. K.S. and Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1011-EX-1205
Civil. Affirms decision of Department of Workforce Development’s Unemployment Insurance Review Board to reinstate unemployment insurance benefits.

Michael P. Heffern v. State of Indiana (NFP)
38A05-1007-CR-462
Criminal. Affirms convictions of felony murder and Class B felony robbery.

Andrew Peters v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1011-CR-621
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation and ordering that Andrew Peters serve the remainder of his previously suspended sentence.

Alisha Gentry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1007-CR-814
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor prostitution.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.H., et al.; S.H., et al. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
45A03-1009-JT-480
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

David Griffin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A05-1006-CR-438
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s decision to admit into evidence David Griffin’s statement to police. Vacates theft conviction on double jeopardy grounds and remands to trial court to enter judgment accordingly.  

Stephanie Henry v. James Henry (NFP)
28A05-1010-DR-696
Domestic relations. Affirms trial court’s award of custody of the children to maternal grandparents.

Christopher Conwell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1008-CR-861
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s admission into evidence of post-arrest statement.

Myron Bernard James v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1007-CR-830
Criminal. Affirms in absentia sentencing.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. 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

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT