ILNews

Opinions Aug. 5, 2011

August 5, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Jayne A. Mathews-Sheets v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
10-3746
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Reverses denial of request for $25,200 in attorney fees after prevailing in a suit for Social Security disability benefits. On remand the plaintiff’s lawyer will have to show that without a cost-of-living increase that would bring the fee award up to $170 per hour, a lawyer capable of competently handling the challenge that his client mounted to the denial of Social Security disability benefits could not be found in the relevant geographical area to handle such a case.

Rik Lineback, Regional Director of the 25th Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the NLRB v. Irving Ready-Mix, Inc.
11-1371
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Jon E. DeGuilio.
Civil. Affirms injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act ordering Irving Ready-Mix Inc. to stop certain unfair labor practices pending a final administrative decision by the National Labor Relations Board. There was no error or abuse of discretion by the District judge.

Indiana Supreme Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
City Savings Bank n/k/a LaPorte Savings Bank v. Eby Construction, LLC
64A03-1012-MF-611
Mortgage foreclosure. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Eby Construction in its complaint that its mechanic’s lien has priority over mortgages held by LaPorte Savings Bank. The trial court erred when it disregarded clear statutory directives based upon equitable and public policy grounds. Remands for further proceedings.

Guardianship of L.W.; S.M. v. M.W. and S.W. (NFP)
33A01-1102-GU-79
Guardianship. Affirms denial of mother S.M.’s petition to terminate M.W. and S.W.’s guardianship over her son.

David and Karen Marks v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co. (NFP)
45A05-1011-CT-675
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for NIPSCO in the Markses’ negligence action.

Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

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