Opinions Aug. 15, 2012

August 15, 2012
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Reko D. Levels v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Reverses convictions of battery and public intoxication as Class B misdemeanors. Levels did not validly waive his right to a jury trial.

JPMCC 2006-CIBC 14 Eads Parkway, LLC v. DBL Axel, LLC, David Richman, Lynette Gridley, as Trustee of the Hartunian Family Trust (u/d/t dated November 8, 1989), Black Diamond Realty, LLC, et al.
Civil plenary. Holds that the trial court erred when it denied JPMCC’s motion for summary judgment on DBL’s complaint for declaratory judgment and when it denied JPMCC’s motion for summary judgment against the guarantors on its claim for breach of the guaranty with respect to the first two installments of the nuisance award. Affirms the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for the guarantors on the question of their liability for the balance of the debt and the grant of summary judgment for DBL on JPMCC’s tort claims. Remands for further proceedings on the amount of the guarantors’ liability to JPMCC.

Mary Barrix and Joe Barrix, Jr. v. Kristopher Jackson and Graves Plumbing Co. Inc.
Civil tort. Affirms judgment on the evidence against the Barrixes and in favor of Jackson and Graves Plumbing on the Barrixes’ suit for negligence following a car accident. Having thus afforded the trial court no opportunity to rule upon the specific portions of Dr. Fulton’s testimony that may have been admissible, the Barrixes invited the trial court’s error and are not entitled to relief. Any error in the trial court’s exclusion of Dr. Fulton’s testimony or the underlying medical records was harmless and thus not a basis for reversal.

Michael R. Jent v. Fort Wayne Police Department
Miscellaneous. Affirms summary judgment for the police department on Jent’s request for declaratory and injunctive relief asking the court to compel the Fort Wayne Police Department to disclose requested records. The undisputed evidence shows that Jent’s request does not identify with reasonable particularity the records he sought.

Michael K. Curts, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Dorothy J. Curts, Deceased v. Miller's Health Systems, Inc. a/k/a Miller's Merry Manor, Logansport, LLC, et al.
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for Miller’s Merry Manor on Michael Curts’ lawsuit for wrongful death, breach of contract and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Concludes that nurses can potentially have sufficient expertise to qualify as experts for purposes of the medical standards of care and medical causation, but the nurse in this case does not qualify. There are no genuine issues of material fact.

In re the Term. of the Parent--Child Rel. of H.S. and N.S. and S.S. & D.S. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Douglas C. Holland v. Rising Sun/Ohio County First, Inc., Ohio County, Rising Sun, Quin Min, and Kirk and Michelle Neace (NFP)
Civil plenary. Affirms order denying Holland’s request to quiet title through adverse possession but reforming the deed in favor of defendants.

Tracy Lynn Weston, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Clinton Dale Weston, Deceased v. Scott D. Longevin, M.D., and Preferred Emergency Specialists, Inc. (NFP)
Civil plenary. Reverses grant of Dr. Longevin and Preferred Emergency Specialists’ motion for summary judgment and remands for further proceedings.

Tondalay Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony possession of cocaine with intent to deliver and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Joshua Ellis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and reinstatement of five years of previously suspended sentence.

Lloyd W. Mezick v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentences for Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent child, Class D felony possession of a controlled substance, Class D felony intimidation, Class A resisting law enforcement, Class A misdemeanor battery on a police officer and two counts of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication.

Derek Dwane Hardy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

D.J. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent child for committing what would be Class A misdemeanor intimidation if committed by an adult.

Floor Mart of Indiana, Inc., Annesse M. Covey, Cherly C. Covey, and William Covey v. Norman Fischer and Julie Fischer (NFP)
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment entered in favor of the Fischers on their complaint for fraud. Remands for further proceedings.

David M. Craft v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery resulting in serious injury.

Victor Salazar v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Larry Burns v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of murder.

Danny K. Peet v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Vernon L. Mefford v. Lori Little and Jason McCord (NFP)
Small claims. Affirms judgment in favor of Little and McCord on Mefford’s claim for damages resulting from a breach of a lease of residential real estate.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.S., Jr., D.S., and J.S., minor children, and C.S., Sr., father v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  2. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  3. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  4. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  5. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well