ILNews

Opinions Dec. 23, 2013

December 23, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael W. Peters, M.D. and Deaconess Hospital, Inc. v. Cynthia S. Kendall and Michael J. Kendall
82A01-1302-PL-55
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of the medical group’s motion for partial summary judgment in the medical malpractice lawsuit brought by the Kendalls. The proof of claim filed by the Kendalls in the liquidation proceedings of Dr. Peters’ insurer does not constitute a binding contract.

Duane Jadrich v. State of Indiana
32A04-1302-CR-67
Criminal. Reverses convictions of Class A misdemeanors possession of marijuana and paraphernalia possession. The sheriff’s deputy’s search of Jadrich’s home after trying to serve a protective order violated the Fourth Amendment.

Town of Newburgh v. Town of Chandler
87A01-1305-CT-203
Civil tort. Affirms denial of summary judgment for Chandler and reverses denial of summary judgment of Newburgh on the issue of whether Newburgh’s ordinance can prevent Chandler from providing new sewer services to customers within a specific area. Remands with instructions to enter summary judgment for Newburgh. The statutes as they exist authorized Newburgh’s ordinance.

Djomon N. Tito v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1304-CR-315
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor battery.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Rel. of: J.S. (Minor Child), and K.G. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1305-JT-438
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: N.F. v. Wishard Health Services, Midtown Community Mental Health Center (NFP)
49A02-1304-MH-306
Mental health. Affirms involuntary commitment.

Shamberley Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1305-CR-231
Criminal. Affirms decision to impose restitution but remands for recalculation of those damages.

Ethan Sizemore v State of Indiana (NFP)
39A05-1306-CR-271
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony burglary.

Stardust Development, LLC v. Randy Cassady (NFP)
53A01-1305-PL-210
Civil plenary. Reverses order that certain real estate jointly owned by Stardust Development and Cassady be sold at sheriff’s sale by public auction with no reserve.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT