Opinions April 9, 2013

April 9, 2013
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Nancie Cloe v. City of Indianapolis
Civil/discrimination. Affirms District Court grant of summary judgment to Indianapolis on Nancy Cloe’s argument that the city failed to reasonably accommodate her injury, but reversed and remanded the District Court’s summary judgment against Cloe’s claims that she was discriminated against and faced retaliation for requesting a work accommodation be made because of her disability.

United States of America v. Tristan Davis

Criminal. Affirmed the 18-month sentence for Tristan Davis on two counts of lying to gun dealers. However, the court pointed to confusion over how much discretion a prosecutor has in deciding to file a motion for a sentence reduction under U.S.S.G. 3E1.1(b). In this case, the prosecutor only filed a motion for a two-level reduction because Davis would not waive his right to appeal. Although the 7th Circuit acknowledged its decision in United States v. Deberry holds that section 3E1.1(b) confers an entitlement on the prosecutor, it also noted the courts of appeals have been split with some reaching a conclusion different from Deberry. Consequently, the 7th Circuit called upon the U.S. Supreme Court or the U.S. Sentencing Commission to resolve the conflict.

The following 7th Circuit opinion was released Monday after IL deadline.
NES Rentals Holdings, Inc., et al., v. Steine Cold Storage, Inc.
Civil. Affirms District Court grant of summary judgment in favor of Steine Cold Storage, holding that the indemnification clause in an equipment-rental agreement does not expressly state, in clear and unequivocal terms as Indiana law requires, that Steine agreed to indemnify NES for NES’s own negligence.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Virgil D. Cornelious v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony aggravated battery and habitual offender determination resulting in a sentence of 30 years in prison, finding that the victim of a stabbing suffered serious permanent disfigurement and that applying the habitual offender statute was not an abuse of discretion.

Danielle Helms v. Max H. Rudicel, M.D., Open Door/BMH Health Clinic (a division of Cardinal Health Systems), Cardinal Health Systems, d/b/a Ball Memorial Hospital, et al.
Civil tort. Affirms in part, reverses in part and remands to the trial court. The federal decision is not res judicata as to BMH’s potential liability as the doctor and clinic’s apparent principal and there is a fact question as to such apparent agency; summary judgment for BMH was error. The trial court correctly found BMH might be vicariously liable for any act of Dr. Max Rudicel or a nurse practitioner at BMH.

Adam Morris v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms the one-year, fully executed sentence of Adam Morris but reverses the trial court’s order that Morris pay $14,972.45 restitution. The Court of Appeals found his sentence to be appropriate, given his character and his offense, and it held although the terms of probation were included in the plea agreement, the lower court was not required to grant probation. However the COA ruled the trial court could not order Morris to pay restitution since the plea agreement made no mention of restitution.

Jorge L. Gonzalez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms three convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and 50-year sentence.

Jeffrey L. Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor battery.

Antonio L. Freeling v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony robbery.

In Re: The Paternity of J.M., Jo.M. v. M.J. (NFP)
Juvenile paternity. Remands trial court order that father Jo.M. pay educational support for his daughter, ordering clarification of the order and father’s obligations to pay toward educational support and child support arrearage.

Darnell Chivers v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Post conviction. Affirms denial of relief from his 20-year sentence for convictions of Class B felony counts of armed robbery and two counts of Class B felony criminal confinement.

Stanley Short v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony escape.

Darnell Tinker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Reaffirms on rehearing conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and his sentence as a habitual offender.

Tori R. Driver v. Todd W.A. Driver (NFP)
Domestic relations. Reverses and remands modification of child support, instructing the trial court  to include father’s bonuses as part of weekly gross income for calculation purposes.

William Gordon v. Toyota Motor Manufacturing of Indiana (NFP)
Executive administration/workers compensation. Vacates the board’s decision adopting and affirming the decision of the single hearing member and remands to the board with instructions to issue findings of fact and conclusions which comport with the Indiana Administrative Orders and Procedures Act such that the court can conduct, if necessary, appellate review of the board’s determination.

Termaine T. Fields v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony residential entry, Class A misdemeanor domestic battery and determination as a habitual offender.

In Re The Marriage of Laura R. Chickadaunce and Mark A. Chickadaunce; Laura R. Chickadaunce v. Mark A. Chickadaunce (NFP)
Divorce. Affirms dissolution of marriage order.

John T. Haub, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms in part, reverses in part and remands convictions of two Class C felony counts of burglary, three Class C felony counts of auto theft, a Class C felony count of receiving stolen auto parts, a Class A misdemeanor count of driving while suspended and an adjudication as a habitual offender. Remanded with instructions to vacate the second burglary conviction and to correct the sentencing order to provide that the habitual offender enhancement applies to a particular offense.

Justin M. Lewis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony counts of criminal confinement and domestic battery; Class A misdemeanor counts of possession of marijuana and possession of paraphernalia; a Class B misdemeanor count of criminal mischief and adjudication as an habitual offender.

Dennis Fahlsing v. Shannon Fahlsing and Angela Taylor (NFP)
Collections. Affirms denial of summary judgment in favor of defendants and order staying the action and compelling arbitration.

Robert Hamilton v. Jerry Ablitar (NFP)

Small claims. Affirms judgment in favor of Ablitar.

Enri Franklin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication. 

Martize Sevion v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms in part and reverses in part convictions on two counts of Class B felony criminal confinement, two counts of Class C felony intimidation and one count of Class D felony pointing a firearm, and adjudication as a habitual offender. The pointing a firearm conviction must be reversed as double-jeopardy.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court issued no opinions Tuesday by IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  2. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  3. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  4. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?

  5. Research by William J Federer Chief Justice John Marshall commented May 9, 1833, on the pamphlet The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States written by Rev. Jasper Adams, President of the College of Charleston, South Carolina (The Papers of John Marshall, ed. Charles Hobson, Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 2006, p, 278): "Reverend Sir, I am much indebted to you for the copy of your valuable sermon on the relation of Christianity to civil government preached before the convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Charleston, on the 13th of February last. I have read it with great attention and advantage. The documents annexed to the sermon certainly go far in sustaining the proposition which it is your purpose to establish. One great object of the colonial charters was avowedly the propagation of the Christian faith. Means have been employed to accomplish this object, and those means have been used by government..." John Marshall continued: "No person, I believe, questions the importance of religion to the happiness of man even during his existence in this world. It has at all times employed his most serious meditation, and had a decided influence on his conduct. The American population is entirely Christian, and with us, Christianity and Religion are identified. It would be strange, indeed, if with such a people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not often refer to it, and exhibit relations with it. Legislation on the subject is admitted to require great delicacy, because freedom of conscience and respect for our religion both claim our most serious regard. You have allowed their full influence to both. With very great respect, I am Sir, your Obedt., J. Marshall."