ILNews

Opinions Aug. 28, 2014

August 28, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Nightingale Home Healthcare, Inc. v. Carey Helmuth and Physiocare Home Healthcare, LLC
29A04-1403-PL-121
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Helmuth and Physiocare Home Healthcare LLC, in which the trial court concluded that Helmuth’s 10-day break in employment with Nightingale served as the starting point of his limited non-competition and non-disclosure agreement.

Ryan Worline v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1312-CR-1041
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for murder.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: D.S. (Minor Child) and T.S. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
02A05-1401-JT-37
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

David K. Asiedu v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1311-CR-486
Criminal. Reverses convictions of Class D felonies fraud and theft, and Class C felony forgery. Remands for further proceedings. Judge Friedlander dissents.

Mitchell Mulnix v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1402-CR-71
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct.

In re the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: A.K. & H.K. (minor children) and A.K. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
19A01-1403-JT-145
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Monisha Rhodes v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1312-CR-1068
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Roger Long v. Advanced Pain Management (NFP)
79A04-1312-CC-503
Civil collection. Reverses denial of Long’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Ind. Trial Rule 41(E). Remands for further proceedings. Judge Bradford dissents.

Daryl Gilbert v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1401-CR-37
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder and Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

 

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. 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?

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT