ILNews

Opinions Aug. 14, 2012

August 14, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Jason Halasa v. ITT Educational Services Inc.
11-3305
Civil. Affirms summary judgment ruling and costs in favor of ITT. Jason Halasa, who directed the company’s Lathrop, Calif., campus for six months in 2009, sued the school on a claim that his rights were violated under the False Claims Act. ITT said Halasa was fired for showing poor management skills and delivering inadequate results.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Andrew Stetler v. State of Indiana
01A04-1201-CR-1
Criminal. Affirms two counts of child molestation and being a habitual offender and resulting sentence of 90 years, concluding that sufficient evidence was presented to support the jury trial conviction and that the sentence was not inappropriate.

Harold O. Fulp, Jr. v. Nancy A. Gilliland, Individually and as Successor Trustee of the Ruth E. Fulp Revocable Trust Dated June 29, 2005
41A01-1111-TR-530
Trust. Reverses in part and remands in part, holding that Ruth Fulp, as trust settlor, could properly execute a purchase agreement for the sale of trust property and that Gilliland, as trustee, did not tortiously interfere with the purchase agreement by rescinding the purchase agreement.

Carlin Iltzsch v. State of Indiana
49A02-1112-CR-1164
Criminal. Reverses and remands with instructions a trial court’s restitution order after finding evidence supporting the order is based on bare, unsworn assertions.

In Re: Rueth Development Company, An Indiana Limited Partnership
45A03-1110-CP-468
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court granting appellees relief under Trial Rule 60(B) and trial court preliminary injunction on capital distribution and attorney fees, but reverses trial court ruling allowing appellees to pursue their claims as a derivative action. Remanded to the trial court to continue dissolution proceedings.

In the Matter of the Paternity of I.B., R.P. v. M.B., As Next of Friend of I.B. (NFP)
84A01-1109-JP-456
Juvenile paternity. Affirms order establishing R.P.’s paternity of minor child, I.B.

Joshua P. Lindsey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1112-PC-1183
Criminal/post-conviction relief. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief on convictions of robbery and resisting law enforcement.

Richard D. Boring v. State of Indiana (NFP)
37A04-1201-CR-10
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Brandon Rhonte McDonald v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1112-CR-687
Criminal. Affirms 35-year sentence for conviction of Class A felony voluntary manslaughter.

Stacey Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1201-CR-46
Criminal. Affirms convictions for Class A felony robbery and Class D felony criminal confinement.

Sadeeq Danbala v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1201-CR-27
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Billy D. Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A02-1112-CR-1195
Criminal. Affirms sentence for failure to comply with conditions related to his status as a sex offender.

C. Dennis Wegner & C. Dennis Wegner & Associates, Professional Corporation v. Michael S. Miller, D.O., and Cohen Garelick & Glazier (NFP)
49A02-1112-CT-1159
Civil tort. Affirms in part and reverses in part, reversing and vacating trial court’s award of attorney fees for a protective order on Miller’s behalf and affirms trial court denying expenses on other motions on Miller’s behalf.

Stephen R. Harvey, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
92A03-1201-CR-21
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.
 

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT