ILNews

Opinions August 24, 2011

August 24, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Arboleda Ortiz v. Thomas Webster, Doctor
10-2012
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Judge Larry McKinney.
Civil. Vacates summary judgment for Dr. Webster and remands with instructions that the case proceed to trial. This is the second time the case has come on appeal and the first time, the 7th Circuit reversed summary judgment for the doctor on the grounds that Ortiz had established fact disputes on the seriousness of his eye condition and the constitutionally of Webster’s delayed response. The record had changed very little on remand yet the District Court granted summary judgment for the doctor. Judge Kanne dissents.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jesus A. Villagrana v. State of Indiana
08A05-1101-CR-21
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony neglect of a dependent. Villagrana was negligent, but the child neglect statute requires intent beyond negligence.

Kerwin Masten and Heather Masten v. AMCO Insurance Company
49A02-1009-CT-998
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment for AMCO Insurance Co. The trial court erred in concluding as a matter of law that no underinsured motorist coverage is available to the Mastens. Remands for further proceedings.

Stephen L. Gilmore v. State of Indiana
40A01-1011-CR-553
Criminal. Reverses on interlocutory appeal the order finding that Gilmore was no longer indigent and that he had waived or forfeited his right to appointed counsel by his obstreperous conduct. The trial court abused its discretion by finding that Gilmore was not indigent and it retains the ability to order him to reimburse the costs of his defense to the extent he is able to do so. Gilmore is entitled to a hearing during which he should be warned that if his difficult behavior persists, the trial court will find he has chosen self-representation by his own conduct. Remands for further proceedings.

S.G. v. State of Indiana
49A05-1011-JV-736
Juvenile. Affirms in part and reverses in part S.G.’s adjudication as a delinquent child for committing what would be Class D felony receiving stolen property if committed by an adult. The facts of this case do not satisfy the requirements of a custodial interrogation and the introduction of S.G.’s statements did not violate Article I, Section 14 of the Indiana Constitution. The trial court abused its discretion in imposing a restitution order in an amount allegedly greater than the victim’s actual loss. Orders a new restitution hearing held if the state desires.

Carrie Chapman v. Irrevocable Trust of Stephen Chapman
02A03-1012-TR-624
Trust. Affirms trial court’s decision with regard to its exercise of jurisdiction over the trust proceedings. Carrie has not established that the trial court could not or should not have exercised jurisdiction over the trust as the subject matter of the trust reformation and the Chapmans’ divorce proceedings is not the same or substantially the same. The trial court erred when it determined the trustees weren’t required to establish that the dissolution was unforeseeable. Because the trustees failed to prove that the dissolution at the time of distribution was unforeseen or not anticipated as required, reverses modification of trust that delayed distribution to Stephen until after the dissolution is final or any appeal therefrom.

Dalmas Maurice Otieno Anyango, et al. v. Rolls Royce Corp., et al.
49A04-1011-CT-679
Civil tort. Affirms grant of Rolls Royce and other appellees’ motion to dismiss on the grounds of forum non conveniens the Anyanagos’ complaint for strict liability and wrongful death. Even if the trial court had not granted the motion to dismiss, the law of British Columbia would apply in Indiana, and the trial court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens.

Matthew Erin Koch v. State of Indiana
82A01-1004-CR-154
Criminal. Affirms kidnapping, robbery, and battery convictions because evidence of probative value was presented at trial from which a jury could find Koch kidnapped Le in Indiana and that the robbery and battery offenses were integrally related. Vacates Koch’s convictions of two counts of Class B felony criminal confinement because of double jeopardy. Reverses 45-year aggregate sentence and remands with instructions to impose an aggregate sentence of 30 years. Judge Riley dissents regarding the sentence revision.

Travelers Insurance Companies, et al. v. Maplehurst Farms, Inc., et al.
49A04-1006-PL-394
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment for Maplehurst that directed Travelers to reimburse Maplehurst for the pre-notice costs and indemnity expenses. The trial court erred in doing so in light of Dreaded Inc. v. St. Paul Guardian Ins. Co. Maplehurst is not entitled to an award of its attorney fees from Travelers. Remands with instructions to enter summary judgment in Travelers’ favor as to those costs and expenses and for further proceedings. Judge May dissents.

James R. Sapp v. Flagstar Bank, FSB
49A02-1101-PL-4
Civil plenary. Affirms in part and reverses in part the denial of Sapp’s motion to correct error, which challenged a summary judgment order upon the claims of Flagstar Bank against Sapp for breach of contract, theft, and unjust enrichment. A genuine issue of material fact remains as to whether or not the bank’s loss of the check and two-month acquiescence was a failure to exercise ordinary care regarding the breach of contract claim. Sapp is entitled to summary judgment on the theft claim because Flagstar didn’t show that Sapp’s control was without authorization such that he could have been found to have criminally stolen the funds. He is also entitled to summary judgment on the unjust enrichment claim. Reverses award of attorney fees for Flagstar. Remands for trial only on the contract claim.

Larry D. Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1102-CR-89
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony aiding in burglary.

Anthony W. Taylor v. Mark Sevier (NFP)
52A02-1010-MI-1252
Miscellaneous. Affirms dismissal of Taylor’s petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Troy T. Hardesty v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1012-CR-819
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony burglary.

D.R., Alleged to be CHINS; E.D. v. IDCS and Child Advocates (NFP)
49A02-1012-JC-1416
Juvenile. Affirms determination that D.R. was a child in need of services.

Terrell B. Wofford v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1011-CR-572
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class A felony battery.
 
Sanchez M. Ellis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1012-CR-673
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony battery, Class D felony battery, and Class D felony resisting law enforcement.

James J. Duchene v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1012-CR-679
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation and imposition of 18 months of previously suspended sentence.

Peter Johnson v. Keith Sove (NFP)
06A01-1102-SC-73
Small claims. Affirms denial of Johnson’s motion to correct error following the denial of his motion to set aside a default judgment in favor of Sove.

William Sebastian, Jr.v. State of Indiana (NFP)
14A01-1012-CR-655
Criminal. Affirms denial of jail credit time.

State of Indiana v. Steven Hollin (NFP)
69A05-1101-PC-113
Post conviction. Reverses grant of Hollin’s petition for post-conviction review. Remands with instructions to deny the petition for post-conviction relief.

Brian E. Crist, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1011-CR-1285
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery.

Thomas E. Curtis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A05-1101-CR-48
Criminal. Reverses conviction of felony murder and remands with instructions.

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. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  2. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

  3. The story that you have shared is quite interesting and also the information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing the article. For more info: http://www.treasurecoastbailbonds.com/

  4. I grew up on a farm and live in the county and it's interesting that the big industrial farmers like Jeff Shoaf don't live next to their industrial operations...

  5. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

ADVERTISEMENT