ILNews

Opinions Aug. 19, 2010

August 19, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Kari Heyser, et al. v. Noble Roman's, Inc., et al.
29A04-1002-PL-71
Civil plenary. Affirms partial summary judgment for Noble Roman’s Inc. and other defendants on Heyser and other franchisees’ claim for constructive fraud. The admission by the franchisees’ attorney that their fraud claims against the banks were based solely on allegedly fraudulent representations by Noble Roman’s, with whom the banks allegedly acted in conspiracy; and the franchisees were alleging actual fraud, not constructive fraud.

Jacqueline Babbitt v. Indiana State Police Trooper Officer E. Lamar Helmuth, in his official capacity (NFP)
71A05-0911-CV-646
Civil. Affirms dismissal of Babbitt’s complaint pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 12(B)(6).

Grante Ficklin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1001-CR-18
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Denise Diggins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1001-CR-119
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony battery.

Midwest Psychological Center, Inc., and Dr. Shelvy Keglar v. Sylvia Funk, et al. (NFP)

49A05-0910-CV-586
Civil. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Funk and other employees or agents of the Indiana State Department of Administration and/or the Division of Disability, Aging, and Rehabilitative Services, Disability Determination Bureau in Midwest’s complaint after not being selected for a bid for a state psychological service contract.

Leroy N. Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A04-1002-CR-79
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony murder, Class B felony conspiracy to commit arson, two counts of Class B felony arson, Class C felony battery by means of a deadly weapon, and Class D felony intimidation.

TBS Development LLC, et al. v. Central Bank & Trust Co. (NFP)
15A01-0911-CV-540
Civil. Affirms finding TBS and other defendants committed fraud, fraud on a financial institution, conversion, and breach of contract, and award of treble damages and attorney’s fees.

Darby Hape v. State of Indiana (NFP)
19A05-1003-CR-163
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for jail-time credit.

Taron Raphael Momon v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-0912-CR-598
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony burglary and Class D felony theft.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT