ILNews

Opinions Aug. 27, 2012

August 27, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrint

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

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Ian McCullough v. State of Indiana
49A02-1106-PC-571
Post-conviction relief. Affirms post-conviction court’s judgment that trial counsel was not ineffective, holding that McCullough failed to carry his burden to show that the evidence as a whole leads unerringly and unmistakably to a conclusion opposite that reached by the post-conviction court.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Successor in interest to The Money Store Investment Corp., f/d/b/a First Union Small Business Capital v. Neal A. Summers, et al.
02A04-1103-CP-112
Civil plenary/rehearing. Reverses prior appellate ruling that complaint was not timely, affirms in part and remands in part, finding that the trial court erred in calculating a judgment of $627,570 in favor of restaurateur Paula Phillips by miscalculating profits against debt. It upheld the judgment on interest expense, salaries, taxes and attorney fees.

Joseph Meizelis v. Dana Durbin and Debra Durbin
70A01-1112-DR-598
Domestic relation. Affirms the trial court properly found that Meizelis lacked a present interest in the Durbins’ farm and could not prevent a settlement between Dana and Debra Durbin. Remands with instructions to strike Meizelis’ lis pendens notice.

Mitzi Bosley v. Niktob, LLC, Design Industries, Inc., Peg Rail, Inc., and Originnovations, Inc.
49A04-1111-PL-599
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court grant of summary judgment in favor of Niktob, holding that the arguments it presented in ejectment court were the same as those presented in another action in environmental court.

Robert Dowell v. State of Indiana
09A05-1201-CR-36
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury. The court gave the jury an additional instruction on accomplice liability without re-reading the rest of the instructions. Remands for a new trial.

Michael Butler and Amanda Butler v. Jerry Hall and Susan Hall (NFP)
07A01-1111-SC-521
Small claims. Affirms trial court judgment in favor of defendants.

Arbie Clay, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1202-CR-156
Criminal. Affirms trial court conviction of Class C felony robbery.
 
Lloyd E. Lynch v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1111-CR-604
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony confinement.
 
Ayman Eldosougi v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1202-CR-103
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

K.C., on Behalf of M.C. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1111-JV-533
Juvenile. Affirms delinquency order requiring payment of certain fees.
 
Robert Cruser, III v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1203-CR-187
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony domestic battery.
 
In the Matter of the Guardianship of Guido Joiko; Kenneth Schaaf v. Fifth Third Bancorp, Guido Joiko, and Geralyn Bradley (NFP)
87A04-1112-GU-705
Guardianship. Affirms trial court ruling that Joiko was of sound mind when he executed a revised trust.

Larry Schine v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1112-CR-1145
Criminal. Affirms in part and remands in part with orders to vacate a conviction of possession of cocaine, which the court ruled violated double jeopardy of a simultaneous conviction of dealing in cocaine.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of A.J.-G., Minor Child, and her Mother, S.J.-G.; S.J.-G. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
71A05-1112-JT-696
Juvenile/termination. Affirms trial court order terminating mother S.J.-G’s parental rights to A.J.-G.
 
Terry Chanley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
87A01-1201-CR-42
Criminal. Affirms trial court denial of motion for jail time credit.

 

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. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT