ILNews

Opinions Aug. 9, 2011

August 9, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Steven Buse, Kathleen Payne, et al. v. Trustees of the Luce Township Regional Sewer District
74A05-1009-PL-590
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court’s conclusion that four counts of the property owners’ complaint constitute a public lawsuit against the Luce Township Regional Sewer District, pursuant to Indiana Code 34-6-2-124. Remands for further proceedings.

Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corp., et al. v. Save the Valley, et al.
49A02-1011-MI-1178
Miscellaneous. Affirms trial court’s determination that Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corp. (IKEC) may not relitigate the issue of associational standing arising from Save the Valley, Inc. v. Indiana-Kentucky Elec. Corp., 820 N.E.2d 677 (2005). Holds that law-of-the-case doctrine bars IKEC from doing so, and that the Indiana Supreme Court has previously held that groups challenging IKEC’s solid waste permit could seek administrative review under the doctrine of associational standing.

Stephen M. Scheckel v. NLI, Inc.
02A04-1010-SC-645
Small claim. Reverses trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of NLI. Holds that the trial court erred when it found that the condition of the tree on NLI’s property that damaged the appellant’s property did not pose an unreasonable risk of harm. Remands for the entry of judgment consistent with the COA opinion.

Brian Haehl v. David Montgomery and Phyliss Crumbo
22A01-1007-TR-319
Trust. Affirms trial court’s denial of attorney fees and additional compensation in favor of Haehl, reverses the court’s award of attorney fees in favor of the appellees, and remands for the court to revise its 2010 order consistent with the COA opinion. Holds that the court’s award of attorney fees under Ind. Code 30-4-3-22(e) was erroneous.

Bethany Quiring, Linda Ann Johnston f/k/a Linda Ann Lougher, et al. v. Geico General Insurance Company
52A02-1012-CT-1434
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s denial of Quiring’s motion to dismiss or stay, finding she was not a resident of her mother’s household when she sought underinsured motorist benefits under a GEICO insurance policy issued to her mother.

Joseph A. Kelley v. Jagdish Patel, Jayandra Patel, d/b/a Economy Inn and Indiana Insurance
79A02-1010-CT-1212
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Indiana Insurance on the estate’s claim of spoliation of evidence, holding that a cause of action is not available under the facts of the case.

Michael Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
61A01-1101-CR-23
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Ronald Miller v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1101-CR-3
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy and resisting law enforcement.

Michelle Hager v. Robert and Sue Faris (NFP)
32A01-1103-CT-89
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of appellees.

Gabriel L. Hill v. Jana E. Hill (NFP)
49A02-1009-DR-1193
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s award of attorney fees to wife and finds the amount appropriate. Affirms division of marital estate and child support order.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.K., et al.; D.A. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
29A02-1101-JT-51
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Jennifer Curts v. David Curts (NFP)
29A02-1010-DR-1138
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s judgment in divorce, stating appellant failed to present a cogent argument on any claims on appeal.

Jeremy Klakamp v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1003-CR-189
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for murder.

Tommy D. Ford v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1009-PC-610
Post conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of T.D., et al.; J.D. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
03A01-1102-JT-46
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Danielle L. Green v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1101-CR-16
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class D felony neglect of a dependent.

The Matter of the 2008 Hancock County Tax Sale (NFP)
30A01-1102-PL-56
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court’s order, holding that the court committed prima facie error in finding it lacked jurisdiction to determine the merits of appellant’s claim. Remands to the trial court with instructions to address appellant’s petition for payment of redemption interest.

Gary Moody v. State of Indiana (NFP)
41A01-1012-CR-649
Criminal. Affirms conviction of disorderly conduct.

J.G. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1101-JD-27
Juvenile. Affirms juvenile court’s placement of J.G. with the Department of Correction.

Beverly A. Fussner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
19A05-1012-CR-812
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s decision to allow the state to reopen its case after the state had rested.

James Hunter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
17A03-1102-CR-106
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

I.M. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1101-JV-41
Juvenile. Reverses trial court’s order that I.M. pay restitution, holding there is no evidence that the court engaged in inquiry sufficient to determine whether I.M. would be able to pay restitution. Remands for new restitution hearing.

Andre L. Gorman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1010-CR-640
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony dealing in cocaine or narcotic drug and related charges.

Robert Holland III v. Country Wide Home Loans, Inc. (NFP)
45A03-1008-MF-487
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion set aside judgment, finding no allegations justifying relief under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B). Denies appellee’s request for attorney fees, finding Holland did not pursue his claim in bad faith.  

Terry T. Miles, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A04-1103-CR-117
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s determination that Miles violated the terms of his home detention.

Dean C. Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1011-PC-1361
Post conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief.

Aaron Davidson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1005-CR-298
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

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. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. 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?

  3. 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.

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT