ILNews

Opinions Aug. 18, 2010

August 18, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Anna LaFaive, also known as Phyllis Click
09-2344
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for two counts of bank fraud and two counts of aggravated identity theft. 18 U.S.C. Section1028A criminalizes the use of both a living or deceased person’s identification. The District Court did not plainly err in calculating or imposing her sentence.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Hematology-Oncology of Indiana, P.C. v. Hadley W. Fruits, Personal Rep. for the Estate of Elizabeth Ann Cadou
49A05-0910-CV-556
Civil. Affirms award of attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses to the estate in its medical malpractice and wrongful death suit. Such an award is available under the Wrongful Death Act or the Adult Wrongful Death Act and the award doesn’t cause the estate’s recovery to exceed the cap provided in the Medical Malpractice Act.

Meridian Security Ins. Co., et al. v. Stefo Gubic, et al.
45A03-0911-CV-538
Civil. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Hoffman Adjustment Co. and Joe Hoffman in Meridian’s third-party complaint that Hoffman breached the terms of the Gubics’ insurance policy, failed to act in good faith, engaged in spoliation of evidence and fraud, committed unauthorized practice of law, and tortiously interfered with Meridian’s business and contractual relationships with the Gubics. Meridian’s claims aren’t actionable under Indiana law because Hoffman had no contractual relationship with Meridian in his capacity as a public adjuster and the Gubics’ agent.

David D. Hauk v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1003-CR-161
Criminal. Affirms aggregate 10-year sentence for operating while intoxicated as a Class D felony and for being a habitual substance offender.

Timothy and Sonia Platt v. Wachovia Dealer Services (NFP)
49A05-1002-PL-148
Civil plenary. Affirms dismissal of the Platts’ complaint against Wachovia regarding modification of their credit agreement with Wachovia.

Wardel Brown, III v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-1001-CR-2
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and sentence imposed.

Alvino Pizano v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1003-PC-220
Post conviction. Affirms calculation and assignment of credit time earned.

Linda Montalvo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A02-0909-CR-931
Criminal. Affirms 25-year sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Terry L. Duckworth v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1001-CR-84
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and execution of Duckworth’s previously suspended sentence.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of T.H.C.; T.C. & C.P. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
71A04-1001-JT-104
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Clyde Edward Pryor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-0912-CR-748
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class D felony attempted residential entry.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of K.N. and D.N.; J.P.N. v. Crawford County DCS (NFP)
13A04-1002-JT-88
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Carlee Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1002-CR-53
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony burglary.

William P. Ruel v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-0911-CR-515
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony failure to return to lawful detention.

Adoption of N.W.; J.R. & L.R. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
79A04-1003-AD-180
Adoption. Affirms denial of petition for adoption of N.W.

Ryan Hade v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1002-CR-102
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felonies robbery, unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, resisting law enforcement, and three counts of criminal confinement.

William Sebastian, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
14A01-1001-CR-20
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and remands for clarification.

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. 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?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT