ILNews

Opinions April 9, 2013

April 9, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Nancie Cloe v. City of Indianapolis
12-1713
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

12-3552
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.
12-1401
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
49A04-1206-CR-335
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.
18A04-1202-CT-70
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
14A05-1209-CR-495
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)
20A05-1206-CR-335
Criminal. Affirms three convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and 50-year sentence.

Jeffrey L. Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
87A05-1210-CR-546
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor battery.

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

02A05-1210-CR-556
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony robbery.

In Re: The Paternity of J.M., Jo.M. v. M.J. (NFP)
55A01-1210-JP-477
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)

24A01-1205-PC-206
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)
69A01-1204-CR-154
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony escape.

Darnell Tinker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1112-CR-587
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)
20A04-1208-DR-437
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)
93A02-1211-EX-910
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)

02A03-1206-CR-278
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)
77A01-1206-DR-287
Divorce. Affirms dissolution of marriage order.

John T. Haub, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
88A01-1206-CR-297
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)
12A04-1210-CR-556
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2013/april/04091302tac.pdf
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)
57A05-1211-CC-584
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2013/april/04091302par.pdf
Collections. Affirms denial of summary judgment in favor of defendants and order staying the action and compelling arbitration.

Robert Hamilton v. Jerry Ablitar (NFP)

07A04-1209-SC-496
Small claims. Affirms judgment in favor of Ablitar.

Enri Franklin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1209-CR-464
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication. 

Martize Sevion v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A04-1207-CR-384
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.
 

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. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  2. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

  3. The story that you have shared is quite interesting and also the information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing the article. For more info: http://www.treasurecoastbailbonds.com/

  4. I grew up on a farm and live in the county and it's interesting that the big industrial farmers like Jeff Shoaf don't live next to their industrial operations...

  5. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

ADVERTISEMENT