ILNews

Opinions Dec. 13, 2011

December 13, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court

Steven Spangler and Heidi Brown v. Barbara Bechtel, Expectations Women's Health and
Childbearing Center, and St. Vincent Randolph Hospital

49S05-1012-CV-703
Civil. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Bechtel and the health and childbearing center. The parents’ separate actions seeking damages for emotional distress from experiencing the stillbirth of their child are not barred by the Indiana Child Wrongful Death Act or the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act. Remands for further proceedings.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Richard M. Clokey v. Penny M. Bosley Clokey
84A01-1009-DR-450
Domestic relation. On rehearing, clarifies the issue of Richard Clokey’s ability to satisfy the maintenance obligation. Even though the trial court did not state so explicitly, the court considered his sources of income and his ability to pay the maintenance. Affirms original opinion in every respect.

Richard and Elizabeth Ryan v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corp. and Elaine E. English d/b/a Agri-Town Agency
56A03-1101-PL-75
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Lawyers Title Insurance Corp. and English. The right of first refusal here was personal and terminated upon the death of Mary Keen as the last surviving grantor of the right. Under the terms of the purchase agreement, the Ryans’ right arose only if the Keens as the sellers offered the land for sale. Judge Baker concurs with separate opinion.

Robert E. Posey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1103-CR-97
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting.

Donald Hurm v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1101-CR-21
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony child molesting and one count of Class C felony child molesting and remands with instructions to revise Hurm’s sentence. Judge Kirsch dissents in part.

The Huntington National Bank v. George P. Broadbent (NFP)
49A05-1012-CC-759
Civil collection. Reverses denial of Huntington’s motion for summary judgment and remands with instructions to enter summary judgment in favor of the bank and conduct a hearing to determine reasonable attorney fees.

Clifton J. Savage v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1104-CR-196
Criminal. Vacates Class D felony theft conviction and remands to the trial court to enter judgment accordingly. Affirms convictions of Class B felony burglary, Class C felony battery and Class A misdemeanor battery.

Nicholas Ryan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1103-CR-230
Criminal. Reverses five convictions of Class B felony criminal confinement, but affirms five other convictions of Class B felony criminal confinement and eight Class B felony robbery convictions. Affirms sentence and remands to the trial court to amend its sentencing order and abstract of judgment.

M. Dale Palmer v. Kay Palmer (NFP)
32A01-1103-DR-108
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s property division in dissolution proceedings.

Edna Kelly v. Johnny Conway, d/b/a Conway Service (NFP)
49A02-1008-PL-1029
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment for Conway in suit alleging breach of contract.

Almaz M. Whyte v. Sam Christie (NFP)
45A05-1010-SC-749
Small claim. Affirms judgment in favor of Christie and against Whyte for $5,250 for the balance due on a verbal loan agreement made between the parties.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT