ILNews

Opinions Aug. 6, 2012

August 6, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinons prior to IL deadline.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Donald Gregory Huls v. State of Indiana

64A04-1110-CR-552
Criminal. Affirms convictions of criminal recklessness, one as a Class D felony and one as a Class C felony. Affirms denial of motion for mistrial because the prosecutor’s isolated comment did not have a probable persuasive effect on the jury and did not place Huls in grave peril. His proposed jury instructions incorrectly stated the law on self-defense or the evidence did not support giving them.  

PNC Bank, National Association, et al. v. LA Development, Inc., Andrew L. Arbuckle, et al., and INTA, LLC v. PNC Bank, National Association, et al.
41A01-1107-MF-314
Mortgage foreclosure. Reverses decision in favor of INTA in an action filed by PNC against LA Development, INTA, and two individuals. The subordination agreement is ambiguous, but concludes PNC did not relinquish all of its rights and remedies in the subordination agreement. Because PNC has shown the requisite provisions of Indiana Code 32-30-5-1 have been satisfied and PNC did not relinquish its mandatory right to the appointment of a receiver, the trial court order is erroneous. Remands for further proceedings.

Janet M. Wright v. State of Indiana (NFP)
11A04-1109-CR-506
Criminal. Affirms denial of Wright’s motion to suppress as to the marijuana found beside her house and the trial court’s deferring to rule on all evidence found inside the home and outbuildings due to insufficient evidence to address that matter. Remands for further proceedings.

Brian L. Millard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
87A01-1201-CR-18
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor criminal recklessness.

Preload, Inc. v. Hammond Water Works Department and Jeffrey Porter General Contractors, Inc. (NFP)
45A05-1201-PL-22
Civil plenary. Reverses the trial court order to the extent that the arbitration order says that Preload must be joined as a party in the arbitration between Jeffrey Porter and Hammond Water Works. Remands for further proceedings. Judge Mathias concurs in result.

Paul Edward McMinn v. Lisa Stephanie McMinn (NFP)
20A03-1106-DR-245
Domestic relation. Affirms in part the order which established that child H.McM. should continue his secondary education at a private, parochial high school. Remands for further proceedings.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT