ILNews

Opinions Dec. 15, 2011

December 15, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Adrianna Brown, et al. v. Columbia Sussex Corp., et al.
10-3849
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
94S00-1101-CQ-50
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)
93A02-1102-EX-64
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)
28A04-1106-CR-364
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in a controlled substance.

Robert D. Spangler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
26A01-1106-CR-284
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed after Spangler pleaded guilty but mentally ill to murder.

Brad A. Morcombe v. Kim D. Morcombe (NFP)
50A03-1104-DR-172
Domestic relation. Affirms division of assets.

Clara Combs v. State of Indiana (NFP)
72A05-1104-CR-148
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)
49A05-1105-PL-217
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)
19A04-1104-CT-193
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)
49A02-1103-EU-245
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)
87A05-1105-PC-280
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Najee Sabree Q. Blackman v. Samantha Maddox, et al. (NFP)
34A05-1106-CT-379
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)

93A02-1103-EX-210
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)
02A05-1104-CT-222
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.
 

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. I work with some older lawyers in the 70s, 80s, and they are sharp as tacks compared to the foggy minded, undisciplined, inexperienced, listless & aimless "youths" being churned out by the diploma mill law schools by the tens of thousands. A client is generally lucky to land a lawyer who has decided to stay in practice a long time. Young people shouldn't kid themselves. Experience is golden especially in something like law. When you start out as a new lawyer you are about as powerful as a babe in the cradle. Whereas the silver halo of age usually crowns someone who can strike like thunder.

  2. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  3. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  4. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  5. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

ADVERTISEMENT