ILNews

Opinions Aug. 13, 2012

August 13, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions prior to IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions prior to IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

CSL Community Association, Inc. v. Clarence Ray Meador
40A01-1112-MI-579
Miscellaneous. Reverses trial court’s grant of Meador’s motion for declaratory judgment that abrogated his obligation to pay homeowner’s association dues, finding that the evidence does not support the trial court’s conclusion that the changes in the community were so radical that the original purpose of the community and the deed restrictions were destroyed, and that the trial court erred in abrogating Meador’s obligation to pay dues and assessments.

Michael Thalheimer v. Ramon and Stacey Halum
49A02-1203-PL-167
Civil plenary. Affirms bench trial findings and judgment in favor of Halum, concluding that Thalheimer waived his claim that Halum spoilated evidence; that the economic loss doctrine did not preclude a negligence claim; and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Thalheimer’s work was poor quality. The court denied Halum’s claim for appellate attorney fees, holding that an award on the argument that the appeal was frivolous and in bad faith was not warranted.

E.J., a minor by his mother and father Victor and Lynell Jeffrey v. Paul Okolocha, M.D., Okolocha Medical Corp., and Okolocha Medical, Pain and Weight
45A03-1201-CT-15
Civil tort. Affirms trial court grant of summary judgment in favor of Okolocha, holding that the doctor owed no duty to adoptive parents to provide prenatal medical records because authorization to release the records did not satisfy elements of HIPPA or Indiana Code 16-39-1-4(1).

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of Ma.J. and My.J.; and K.B. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services
27A02-1112-JT-1193
Juvenile/termination of parental rights. Reverses termination of mother’s parental rights, concluding that the Department of Child Services failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that the conditions resulting in children’s removal would not be remedied due to the mother’s progress over eight months in meeting areas of concern.

Dennis Feyka v. State of Indiana
49A02-1108-CR-703
Criminal. Affirms trial court conviction of Class A felony child molesting, holding that a prosecutor’s references to Feyka’s failure to testify were not fundamental error and that there was sufficient evidence to support Feyka’s conviction.

Anastazia Schmid v. State of Indiana
79A04-1110-PC-618
Post conviction relief. Affirms post-conviction court’s denial of petition for post-conviction relief, finding the appellant-defendant did not demonstrate counsels’ alleged errors were prejudicial.

Kendrice Dorsey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A04-1109-PC-563
Criminal/post-conviction relief. Appeals trial court denial of post-conviction relief for Class A felony possession of cocaine with intent to deliver.

Elsa M. McLaughlin v. John C. Clark and Zore's, Inc. (NFP)

49A02-1109-CT-862
Civil tort. Affirms trial court ruling in favor of Clark.

Gene Hildebrandt v. Pepsi America a/k/a Globe Transport (NFP)
93A02-1111-EX-1033
Executive administrative/workers’ compensation. Affirms denial of application for adjustment of claim.

Warren Parks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
81A01-1201-CR-19
Criminal. Affirms trial court order of contempt of court.

Cleverly Lockhart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A04-1204-CR-226
Criminal. Affirms trial court denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Marshall Jackson v. Beckie Bennett (NFP)
49A02-1112-MI-1199
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial for petition of writ of habeus corpus.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of D.Y.; M.Y. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1112-JT-1121
Juvenile/termination. Affirms trial court termination of parental rights.

Rachel Ann Ruch v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A05-1202-CR-96
Criminal. Affirms trial court judgment for restitution from a conviction of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of E.Y., Minor Child; A.Y., Mother v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, and Child Advocates, Inc. (NFP)
49A04-1112-JT-702
Juvenile/termination of parental rights. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Jeffrey M. Steffen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
19A04-1110-CR-588
Criminal. Affirms convictions of four Class D felony counts of intimidation and theft.

Sherri Hillenburg and Dennis Hillenburg v. Paul D. Reeves and Norma J. Reeves Revocable Trust; Paul Reeves, Norma J. Reeves and John Reeves (NFP)
53A04-1111-PL-615
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of motion to correct error.


 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. One can only wonder whether Mr. Kimmel was paid for his work by Mr. Burgh ... or whether that bill fell to the citizens of Indiana, many of whom cannot afford attorneys for important matters. It really doesn't take a judge(s) to know that "pavement" can be considered a deadly weapon. It only takes a brain and some education or thought. I'm glad to see the conviction was upheld although sorry to see that the asphalt could even be considered "an issue".

  2. In response to bryanjbrown: thank you for your comment. I am familiar with Paul Ogden (and applaud his assistance to Shirley Justice) and have read of Gary Welsh's (strange) death (and have visited his blog on many occasions). I am not familiar with you (yet). I lived in Kosciusko county, where the sheriff was just removed after pleading in what seems a very "sweetheart" deal. Unfortunately, something NEEDS to change since the attorneys won't (en masse) stand up for ethics (rather making a show to please the "rules" and apparently the judges). I read that many attorneys are underemployed. Seems wisdom would be to cull the herd and get rid of the rotting apples in practice and on the bench, for everyone's sake as well as justice. I'd like to file an attorney complaint, but I have little faith in anything (other than the most flagrant and obvious) resulting in action. My own belief is that if this was medicine, there'd be maimed and injured all over and the carnage caused by "the profession" would be difficult to hide. One can dream ... meanwhile, back to figuring out to file a pro se "motion to dismiss" as well as another court required paper that Indiana is so fond of providing NO resources for (unlike many other states, who don't automatically assume that citizens involved in the court process are scumbags) so that maybe I can get the family law attorney - whose work left me with no settlement, no possessions and resulted in the death of two pets (etc ad nauseum) - to stop abusing the proceedings supplemental and small claims rules and using it as a vehicle for harassment and apparently, amusement.

  3. Been on social security sense sept 2011 2massive strokes open heart surgery and serious ovarian cancer and a blood clot in my lung all in 14 months. Got a letter in may saying that i didn't qualify and it was in form like i just applied ,called social security she said it don't make sense and you are still geting a check in june and i did ,now i get a check from my part D asking for payment for july because there will be no money for my membership, call my prescription coverage part D and confirmed no check will be there.went to social security they didn't want to answer whats going on just said i should of never been on it .no one knows where this letter came from was California im in virginia and been here sense my strokes and vcu filed for my disability i was in the hospital when they did it .It's like it was a error . My ,mothers social security was being handled in that office in California my sister was dealing with it and it had my social security number because she died last year and this letter came out of the same office and it came at the same time i got the letter for my mother benefits for death and they had the same date of being typed just one was on the mail Saturday and one on Monday. . I think it's a mistake and it should been fixed instead there just getting rid of me .i never got a formal letter saying when i was being tsken off.

  4. Employers should not have racially discriminating mind set. It has huge impact on the society what the big players do or don't do in the industry. Background check is conducted just to verify whether information provided by the prospective employee is correct or not. It doesn't have any direct combination with the rejection of the employees. If there is rejection, there should be something effective and full-proof things on the table that may keep the company or the people associated with it in jeopardy.

  5. Unlike the federal judge who refused to protect me, the Virginia State Bar gave me a hearing. After the hearing, the Virginia State Bar refused to discipline me. VSB said that attacking me with the court ADA coordinator had, " all the grace and charm of a drive-by shooting." One does wonder why the VSB was able to have a hearing and come to that conclusion, but the federal judge in Indiana slammed the door of the courthouse in my face.

ADVERTISEMENT