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. 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