ILNews

Opinions Aug. 31, 2012

August 31, 2012
Keywords
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
Seabrook, Dieckmann & Naville, Inc. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Monica Hilbert
93A02-1202-EX-100
Agency action. Reverses board’s conclusion that Hilbert’s employment was not terminated for just cause. Based on the evidence and testimony, Seabrook Dieckmann & Naville showed that Hilbert breached a duty in connection with work which was reasonably owed to her employer and her conduct was of such a nature that a reasonable employee would understand that the conduct was a violation of a duty owed to the funeral home. Remands for further proceedings.

Patricia J. Barrow and Charlie Hanka v. City of Jeffersonville, Jeffersonville Planning and Zoning Dept., Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeal, Jeffersonville Building Comm., et al.
10A05-1112-PL-647
Civil plenary. Affirms conclusion that Chester Hicks, city director of planning and zoning, and Russell Segraves, city building commissioner, were public officers and the statute of limitations in I.C. 34-11-2-6 was applicable to this case. Concludes that the director and building commissioner were public officers because both held positions for which duties are prescribed by law to serve a public purpose. Reverses summary judgment for the defendants because the plaintiffs’ complaint was timely filed.

Wabash County Young Men's Christian Association, Inc. f/k/a Wabash Community Service v. Taylor M. Thompson, a minor, by next friends, Brian Thompson and Charlene Thompson
85A05-1203-CT-138
Civil tort. Reverses order denying the YMCA’s motion to dismiss a negligence complaint brought by a 17-year-old injured while playing softball from sliding into base. The release form signed by Taylor Thompson’s mother was valid, and the teen’s injury was derived from a risk inherent in the nature of playing softball.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: B.F. (Minor Child), and M.G. & S.F. (Father & Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services
26A04-1202-JT-90
Juvenile. Reverses termination of parental rights. The trial court committed fundamental error in terminating the parents’ rights when the child was removed under a dispositional decree for less than six months.

Alice Lee v. State of Indiana
49A02-1112-CR-1090
Criminal. Affirms conviction of attendance at an animal fighting contest as a Class A misdemeanor. Indiana Code 34-46-3-10 is not unconstitutionally vague.

Roderick Vandrell Lewis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1201-CR-18
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of felony murder.

Carroll S. Channell, Trustee of the Revocable Living Trust of Carroll S. Channell dated August 21, 2000, et al. v. Tim Moffatt and Bill Moffatt (NFP)
59A04-1112-PL-664
Civil plenary. Affirms pre-trial order resolving all pending motions in an action originally brought to quiet title to real estate located in Orange County. Remands for further proceedings.

Jeremy Lamar Lloyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1202-CR-79
Criminal. Affirms sentences for two counts of Class C felony burglary.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of S.S., minor child, and D.S., mother, and W.S., father; D.S. and W.S. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
53A05-1112-JT-673
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

B.C. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1202-JV-68
Juvenile. Vacates order B.C. register as a sex offender as the order was premature and remands with instructions.

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT