ILNews

Opinions Aug. 7, 2014

August 7, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Wednesday:
Howard County Assessor v. Kokomo Mall, LLC
49T10-1109-TA-56
Tax. Affirms the final determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review that reduced Kokomo Mall LLC’s commercial property assessments for the 2007, 2008 and 2009 tax years. Court declines to reweigh the evidence presented to the board and rejects the assessor’s claim that the mere presentation of a USPAP appraisal establishes a prima facie case.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Indiana Insurance Company v. Patricia Kopetsky, and KB Home Indiana Inc.
49A02-1304-PL-340
Civil plenary. Grants rehearing to correct a factual error and clarify the original holding. Finds the known claim exclusion applies in this case and that coverage is barred for the second through fourth years, regardless of a jury’s finding of any prior knowledge. Any finding regarding whether George Kopetsky had any knowledge of contamination prior to the first year of insurance coverage applies only to the first year.

Ryan Gold v. Starr Weather
49A02-1311-JP-995
Juvenile. Affirms order approving Weather’s request to relocate and Gold’s motion to modify custody. Finds there is sufficient evidence to support the finding that Weather relocated in order to be close to her immediate and extended family, which is a legitimate purpose. It is well within the discretion of the trial court to place more weight on the evidence that favors the mother as the physical custodian based on the child’s best interests rather than evidence favoring the father based on her efforts to thwart his relationship with his child. Judge Robb concurs in result in a separate opinion.

Rio Michaels v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1311-CR-559
Criminal.  Affirms convictions of Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license with a prior felony and Class D felony criminal recklessness.

D'Arcy Lambert-Knight v. John S. Shelhart and Jennifer Villars (NFP)
64A03-1310-CT-408
Civil tort. Affirms court’s conversion of Villars’ motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment.

Jeanne Rippe v. Daniel Rippe (NFP)
17A05-1312-DR-611
Domestic relation. Finds Jeanne Rippe’s challenges to orders from 2011 and 2013 are forfeited or waived. Remands to the trial court with instructions to determine appellate attorney fees for Daniel Rippe because his ex-wife’s appeal is frivolous.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT