ILNews

Opinions Aug. 12, 2010

August 12, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Frank McAllister v. Jerry L. Price, in his individual capacity
10-1213
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Joseph S. Van Bokkelen.
Civil. Affirms denial of summary judgment for police officer Price, who claimed qualified immunity. There are genuine issues of material fact about whether Price violated McAllister’s clearly established constitutional rights. McAllister alleges that Price violated his Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force to remove McAllister from his car after suffering a diabetic episode that resulted in the crash.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Sears Roebuck and Co. v. Vicky James, Michael Soja, et al.
71A03-1002-CT-104
Civil tort. Affirms order refusing to set aside a default judgment in favor of Soja and James on James’ complaint asserting product liability and negligence against Sears. There is no evidence of excusable neglect. Judge Kirsch dissents.  

Ernest L. Cleary v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1272
Criminal. Affirms determination that Cleary has the ability to pay restitution. Reverses order for restitution for the van’s loss of use. Remands with instructions.

Jerry H. Guffey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-0911-CR-624
Criminal. Affirms convictions of felony murder, and Class D felonies auto theft and aiding, inducing, or causing arson.

Kimberly N. Davis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1001-CR-8
Criminal. Revises sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class D felony battery. Remands with instructions.

Cynthia Ingling and Thomas Grose v. Melissa Grose (NFP)
20A04-1001-ES-25
Estate, supervised. Reverses setting of plaintiffs’ will contest bond at $10,000. Remands for reinstatement of plaintiffs’ claim.

In re the Guardianship of H.W.; R.R. v. R.B. (NFP)
07A01-1003-GU-112
Guardianship. Affirms denial of R.R.’s Indiana Trial Rule 60(B)(6) motion to set aside a consent order awarding guardianship of her child to maternal grandmother.

Mark W. Phillips v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1001-CR-41
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class C felony child molesting.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of L.P.; H.P. v. Tippecanoe County DCS (NFP)
79A02-0912-JV-1215
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Robtavious Collins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1001-CR-99
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of heroin within 1,000 feet of school property.

Roger Hendrickson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1255
Criminal. Affirms conviction of interference with reporting of a crime as a Class A misdemeanor.

William Young v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1001-CR-10
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony burglary and Class D felony criminal recklessness.

T.D.J. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1001-JV-78
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication for committing what would be Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct if committed by an adult.

Eugene and L. Anita Hurt v. Estate of Eulalia May, et al. (NFP)
48A02-0912-CV-1248
Civil. Affirms judgment in favor of the estate in its action to foreclose against the Hurts on a real estate contract.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

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. 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!!!

  2. 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?

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT