Opinions Dec. 15, 2011

December 15, 2011
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Adrianna Brown, et al. v. Columbia Sussex Corp., et al.
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Chief Judge Philip P. Simon.
Civil. Affirms dismissal of 53 of the 224 plaintiffs who had their civil rights and breach of contract claims dismissed because they continually missed both formal and informal deadlines. Holds that, in the context of a multi-party or multi-claim suit, a premature notice of appeal from the dismissal of a party or claim will ripen upon the entry of a belated Rule 54(b) judgment under Rule 4(a)(2) and FirsTier. The District Court was within its discretion to find that the appellants acted willfully, in bad faith, or with fault.

Indiana Supreme Court
David R. Snyder v. J. Bradley King and Trent Deckard, in their Official Capacities as Co-Directors of the Indiana Election Division; and Linda Silcott and Pam Brunette
Certified question. Holds that the Indiana Constitution was not violated when, upon being convicted of Class A misdemeanor battery and sentenced to an executed term of incarceration, Snyder was disenfranchised, but only for the duration of his incarceration. Also holds that the General Assembly has separate constitutional authority to cancel the registration of any person incarcerated following conviction, for the duration of incarceration.

Indiana Court of Appeals
P.J. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, and Indianapolis Public Schools (NFP)
Agency appeal. Affirms determination that P.J. voluntarily left his employment without good cause and was ineligible for unemployment compensation.

Donald S. Forker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in a controlled substance.

Robert D. Spangler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed after Spangler pleaded guilty but mentally ill to murder.

Brad A. Morcombe v. Kim D. Morcombe (NFP)
Domestic relation. Affirms division of assets.

Clara Combs v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for dealing in a schedule II controlled substance as a Class B felony.

Good Host, LLC v. Advanced Interventional Pain Center, LLC (NFP)
Civil plenary. Affirms finding that Good Host failed to state a claim for breach of contract under the theory of an assignment of the lease. Reverses dismissal of Good Host’s equitable assignment claim and remands for further proceedings.

P. Bryan Lilly, D.O. v. Tammy Meserve, as Natural Guardian of Samantha Jo Aders, Darien Aders, and Mason James Aders, minors (NFP)
Civil tort. Affirms in part and reverses in part judgment in favor of Meserve on her complaint alleging Dr. Lilly’s negligence resulted in Chad Aders’ death. Any error in the admission of Exhibit 4 or the expert testimony relating the content of the autopsy report did not affect Lilly’s substantial rights and was harmless. The trial court improperly denied Meserve’s request for attorney fees. Remands for the calculation of such.

In Re: (Supervised) Estate of Robert E. Bradley, Decedent; Phyllis C. Bradley v. Martha T. Starkey (NFP)
Estate, unsupervised. Affirms probate court’s order on the emergency petition to recover estate assets filed by Starkey.

Joshua Hudson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Najee Sabree Q. Blackman v. Samantha Maddox, et al. (NFP)
Civil tort. Affirms dismissal of Blackman’s complaint for damages.

R.D. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, et al. (NFP)

Agency appeal. Reverses denial of unemployment benefits.

Theresa L. Trensey and Louis L. Roth, Sr. v. Garland D. Anderson, M.D., Parkview Medical Group, and Unnamed Hospital, Inc. d/b/a Unnamed Hospital (NFP)
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Dr. Anderson, Parkview Medical Group and the unnamed hospital on the parents’ complaint for damages alleging medical malpractice.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This is ridiculous. Most JDs not practicing law don't know squat to justify calling themselves a lawyer. Maybe they should try visiting the inside of a courtroom before they go around calling themselves lawyers. This kind of promotional BS just increases the volume of people with JDs that are underqualified thereby dragging all the rest of us down likewise.

  2. I think it is safe to say that those Hoosier's with the most confidence in the Indiana judicial system are those Hoosier's who have never had the displeasure of dealing with the Hoosier court system.

  3. I have an open CHINS case I failed a urine screen I have since got clean completed IOP classes now in after care passed home inspection my x sister in law has my children I still don't even have unsupervised when I have been clean for over 4 months my x sister wants to keep the lids for good n has my case working with her I just discovered n have proof that at one of my hearing dcs case worker stated in court to the judge that a screen was dirty which caused me not to have unsupervised this was at the beginning two weeks after my initial screen I thought the weed could have still been in my system was upset because they were suppose to check levels n see if it was going down since this was only a few weeks after initial instead they said dirty I recently requested all of my screens from redwood because I take prescriptions that will show up n I was having my doctor look at levels to verify that matched what I was prescripted because dcs case worker accused me of abuseing when I got my screens I found out that screen I took that dcs case worker stated in court to judge that caused me to not get granted unsupervised was actually negative what can I do about this this is a serious issue saying a parent failed a screen in court to judge when they didn't please advise

  4. I have a degree at law, recent MS in regulatory studies. Licensed in KS, admitted b4 S& 7th circuit, but not to Indiana bar due to political correctness. Blacklisted, nearly unemployable due to hostile state action. Big Idea: Headwinds can overcome, esp for those not within the contours of the bell curve, the Lego Movie happiness set forth above. That said, even without the blacklisting for holding ideas unacceptable to the Glorious State, I think the idea presented above that a law degree open many vistas other than being a galley slave to elitist lawyers is pretty much laughable. (Did the law professors of Indiana pay for this to be published?)

  5. Joe, you might want to do some reading on the fate of Hoosier whistleblowers before you get your expectations raised up.