ILNews

Opinions April 28, 2011

April 28, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Andrew C. Koons v. United States of America
09-3025
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, Chief Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Affirms denial of Koons’ motion to vacate his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Koons failed to establish that his trial counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Ben and Elaine Life v. F.C. Tucker Company, Inc., et al.
49A02-1008-CC-931
Civil collections. Affirms denial of the Lifes’ motion to correct error following summary judgment in favor of defendants F.C. Tucker Co. and Tucker Home Link. The Lifes’ response to Tucker’s motion for summary judgment was late and the trial court didn’t err in striking it along with the designation of evidence and attached affidavits. There is no contract between Tucker and the Lifes, so summary judgment for Tucker on the breach of contract claim and negligence claim was appropriate.

Meridian Title Corp., v. Pilgrim Financing, LLC
45A05-1010-CC-613
Civil collection. Affirms judgment in favor of Pilgrim Financing with respect to Pilgrim’s claim that Meridian negligently disbursed the net proceeds from a refinancing transaction. There is sufficient evidence to establish that Meridian held Pilgrim’s payoff letter and partial release in escrow and that Meridian breached its duty to Pilgrim.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of I.A., et al.; K.B. v. IDCS (NFP)
02A03-1008-JT-437
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Rodney A. Covington v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1007-CR-465
Criminal. Affirms revocation of work release and imposition of the balance of Covington’s suspended sentence.

Brandon Lee Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1006-CR-367
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for murder and attempted murder.

Michael Fields v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1008-CR-480
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia.

Kendall D. McGee v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1010-CR-568
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony criminal confinement, Class D felony strangulation, Class A misdemeanor battery, and finding that McGee is a habitual offender.

John W. Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1009-CR-555
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony criminal recklessness.

Terry Martin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1010-CR-1130
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

Mary Maksimik v. SLB Mobil, Inc., et al. (NFP)
64A03-1010-CT-526
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment in favor of SLB and other defendants in Maksimik’s suit alleging breach of duty of care.

Corey Pannell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1008-CR-513
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, Class D felony intimidation, and Class D felony criminal recklessness.

Jonathan Grider Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
16A01-1011-CR-599
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation and ordering Grider to serve the balance of his suspended sentence.

John Bradley IV v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1009-CR-488
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea.

Steve A. Thomas v. Phyllis A. Briggs (NFP)
09A04-1007-DR-446
Domestic relation. Affirms order that Thomas pay a child support arrearage.

Carl Hoover v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1008-CR-519
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony child seduction, upon which conviction was entered as a Class A misdemeanor.

Anahel A. Amaya v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1008-CR-598
Criminal. Revises sentence for 10 counts of child molesting as Class A felonies to 60 years.

Scott Wayne Mosby and Shelly M. Mosby (NFP)
62A01-1011-DR-579
Domestic relation. Affirms order that Scott Mosby pay permanent maintenance of $1,000 a month.

Phillip D. Hartsough v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1006-CR-343
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Gale S. Shawyer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A04-1007-CR-503
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of D.H., et al.; Y.H. v. IDCS (NFP)
71A03-1009-JT-507
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

R.B. v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1004-EX-497
Civil. Affirms denial of unemployment benefits.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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