ILNews

Opinions April 29, 2013

April 29, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Swami, Inc., et al. v. Franklin Drywall II, LLC (NFP)
10A01-1208-MF-398
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms determination that Franklin Drywall was entitled to recover $48,681.60 and award of attorney fees to the company in dispute over delays in completing drywall work. Reverses finding that a certain mortgage debt should not be considered to be a lien against the property in question. Remands for further proceedings.

Renee Tripp v. William Bockman (NFP)
43A03-1208-DR-375
Domestic relation. Affirms in part order on mother’s petition for arrearages and remands with instructions to address her request for a determination of any arrearage related to father’s basic child support obligation.

Anthony Minney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-CR-481
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class C felony escape.

DeMarkus Adams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1210-CR-776
Criminal. Affirms murder conviction.

Tony Campos v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A05-1210-CR-511
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery with a deadly weapon.

Raymond Carter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1210-CR-779
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions 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