ILNews

Opinions Dec. 27, 2013

December 27, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Dawn Marie Adams v. James Gregory Adams
13-1636
Civil. Reverses District Court denial of creditor Dawn Marie Adams’ bankruptcy court claim against her former husband and business partner, James Gregory Adams. The bankruptcy court claims were previously adjudicated in state courts and the doctrine of issue preclusion prevented the bankruptcy court from rehearing those issues. Remanded for proceedings.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of M.S. (A Child Alleged in Need of Services), and K.S., (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services
67A04-1305-JC-212
Juvenile. Affirms placement of M.S. with father who lives out-of-state and approval of the Department of Child Services’ petition to dismiss CHINS proceedings. The best interest of the child were served by placement with father and DCS’s efforts at reunifying the family were reasonable, Chief Judge Margret Robb wrote in an opinion joined by Judge Michael Barnes. Judge Elaine Brown concurred in a separate opinion that said M.S.’s interests would have been best served had DCS continued monitoring father’s compliance with court terms for a period of time.

State of Indiana v. Frank Greene
49A02-1303-PC-228
Post conviction. Affirms grant of post-conviction relief from a conviction of Class B felony criminal confinement and remands to the trial court with instructions to resentence Greene on the conviction as a Class D felony.  

In Re the Matter of R.K.: A Child Alleged to be a Child in Need of Services, A.K. v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
31A01-1307-JC-310
Juvenile. Reverses juvenile court order awarding child custody to father, R.K. Sr., holding that the court abused its discretion by modifying custody without a formal evidentiary hearing. Vacates the modification order and remands for an evidentiary hearing on the modification petition.

DeWayne Nalls v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1306-CR-281
Criminal. Affirms concurrent sentences of 35 years for conviction of Class A felony attempted murder and 10 years for unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, but vacates as illegal a separate five-year enhancement for the firearm charge.  

Cleverly Lockhart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1304-CR-384
Criminal. Reverses trial court’s denial of a petition to file a belated notice of appeal of four counts of child molesting and remands for proceedings.

Clarian Health Partners, Inc., d/b/a Methodist Hospital v. Jessica Sprunger, as next best friend of James Daniel Sprunger, Minor (NFP)
49A02-1211-CT-943
Civil tort/medical malpractice. Finds the trial court erred in denying Clarian’s motion to correct error after a jury award of $500,000 in favor of James Sprunger. The court also abused its discretion in instructing the jury. Remanded for proceedings.

Virginia Davis v. Indiana State Board of Nursing (NFP)
49A05-1304-PL-187
Civil plenary. Affirms Indiana State Board of Nursing’s license revocation.

In Re the Estate of Ruby Shuler Blankenbaker Botkins, Deceased, Mark Allen Shuler and David Lee Shuler v. Estate of George Botkins by Larry Botkins (NFP)
22A01-1307-ES-337
Estate. Affirms probate court’s entry of final accounting.

Jamar Perkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1306-CR-551
Criminal. Affirms conviction of felony murder.

John D. May v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A05-1307-PC-320
Post conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief from a conviction of Class C felony possession of methamphetamine while in possession of a firearm.

Darrell McNary v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1211-PC-607
Post conviction. Affirms denial of relief from a conviction of Class B felony dealing cocaine.

Brandon White v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1304-CR-188
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony criminal recklessness.

Bonnie Shipley v. Anonymous Doctor A and Anonymous Hospital C (NFP)
40A04-1304-PL-184
Civil plenary/malpractice. Affirms grant of summary judgment in favor of Anonymous Doctor A and Anonymous Hospital C.

James E. Britt, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1304-CR-152
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony possession of marijuana and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Ron Rose v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1306-PC-272
Post conviction. Reverses denial of a petition for relief from a conviction of Class B felony criminal deviate conduct, holding that the court clearly erred in imposing a lifelong requirement that Ron Rose register as a sexually violent predator rather than as a sex offender. Rose proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he didn’t understand that aspect of his guilty plea, and he had specifically rejected that provision when discussing the plea agreement with his attorney beforehand. Remanded for proceedings.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court issued no opinions prior to IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. @ President Snow, like they really read these comments or have the GUTS to show what is the right thing to do. They are just worrying about planning the next retirement party, the others JUST DO NOT CARE about what is right. Its the Good Ol'Boys - they do not care about the rights of the mother or child, they just care about their next vote, which, from what I gather, the mother left the state of Indiana because of the domestic violence that was going on through out the marriage, the father had three restraining orders on him from three different women, but yet, the COA judges sent a strong message, go ahead men put your women in place, do what you have to do, you have our backs... I just wish the REAL truth could be told about this situation... Please pray for this child and mother that God will some how make things right and send a miracle from above.

  2. I hear you.... Us Christians are the minority. The LGBTs groups have more rights than the Christians..... How come when we express our faith openly in public we are prosecuted? This justice system do not want to seem "bias" but yet forgets who have voted them into office.

  3. Perhaps the lady chief justice, or lady appellate court chief judge, or one of the many female federal court judges in Ind could lead this discussion of gender disparity? THINK WITH ME .... any real examples of race or gender bias reported on this ezine? But think about ADA cases ... hmmmm ... could it be that the ISC actually needs to tighten its ADA function instead? Let's ask me or Attorney Straw. And how about religion? Remember it, it used to be right up there with race, and actually more protected than gender. Used to be. Patrick J Buchanan observes: " After World War II, our judicial dictatorship began a purge of public manifestations of the “Christian nation” Harry Truman said we were. In 2009, Barack Obama retorted, “We do not consider ourselves to be a Christian nation.” Secularism had been enthroned as our established religion, with only the most feeble of protests." http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/is-secession-a-solution-to-cultural-war/#q3yVdhxDVMMxiCmy.99 I could link to any of my supreme court filings here, but have done that more than enough. My case is an exclamation mark on what PJB writes. BUT not in ISC, where the progressives obsess on race and gender .... despite a lack of predicate acts in the past decade. Interested in reading more on this subject? Search for "Florida" on this ezine.

  4. Great questions to six jurists. The legislature should open a probe to investigate possible government corruption. Cj rush has shown courage as has justice Steven David. Who stands with them?

  5. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

ADVERTISEMENT