ILNews

Opinions Dec. 13, 2010

December 13, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Involuntary Commitment of G.M.
33A01-1006-MH-325
Mental health. Holds that the committing court’s conclusion for the basis of its order to commit G.M.  – that he was incapable of providing himself food, clothing, shelter, or other essential human needs - wasn’t supported by the evidence. G.M. may be determined to be gravely disabled under another definition set forth in statute. Remands for a review of G.M.’s care and treatment.

Town of New Chicago v. City of Lake Station, et al.
45A03-1001-PL-22
Civil plenary. Reverses grant of partial summary judgment for Lake Station on the issue of liability and denial of New Chicago’s motion for summary judgment. There is no private right of action under the Clean Water Act. Laches is not available to New Chicago as a defense for Lake Station’s breach of contract claim. New Chicago met its burden of proving the defense of equitable estoppel. Remands for summary judgment to be entered in favor of New Chicago on its equitable estoppel defense.

Michelle Daub v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A02-1003-CR-325
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress.

J.R. v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1001-EX-4
Civil. Affirms denial of request for unemployment benefits.

Antelmo Juarez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1006-CR-405
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for murder.

Tiara N. White v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A04-1005-CR-341
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following revocation of probation.

Justin Morris v. State of Indiana (NFP)
54A04-1005-CR-325
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea but mentally ill to murder and Class B felony arson.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court granted two transfers and denied 27 for the week ending Dec. 10.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT