ILNews

Opinions April 4, 2011

April 4, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Billy L. Hicks
09-3608
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Criminal. Vacates conviction of knowingly distributing more than 50 grams of crack cocaine. The District Court improperly allowed evidence of Hicks' prior drug convictions in violation of Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). Remands for a new trial.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Meridian Title Corporation v. Gainer Group, LLC
46A03-1006-PL-312
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of Meridian Title Corp.’s motion for summary judgment in Gainer Group's suit based upon Meridian’s alleged failure to properly handle Gainer Group's claim, seeking to recover the litigation expenses and attorney fees it incurred prior to Lawyers Title’s acceptance of its claim. Meridian had an extended duty to advise Gainer Group regarding coverage, and it fulfilled that duty.

Robert Arnold v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1008-CR-510
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony child molesting.

Michael L. Spencer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A04-1009-CR-601
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance.

Edwin Blinn, Jr. v. Robert Hammerle and Hammerle & Cleary (NFP)
49A02-1006-CT-634
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Hammerle on Blinn’s claims of malpractice and unjust enrichment. Judge May dissents.

Athena Jackson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-CR-767
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of B.F., et al.; E.C.F. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)

71A03-1008-JT-608
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Elkhart General Hospital v. Doris Williams (NFP)
20A05-1007-CT-467
Civil tort. Affirms order denying Elkhart General Hospital’s motion to correct error after a jury trial resulted in a verdict in favor of Williams, individually and as the administratrix of the estate of Ben Williams Sr.

Larry E. Webb Construction, et al. v. Theresa Burns (NFP)
45A04-1011-PL-685
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Burns’ claim under the Indiana Wage Payment Act and awarding her nearly $7,000 in damages. Remands with instructions to enter an order granting summary judgment in favor of Eclipse and proceed to trial regarding the claims against Webb Construction and, following trial, recalculate the amount of attorney fees, if any, to which Burns is entitled.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court granted one transfer and denied 16 for the week ending April 1.
 

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