Opinions Dec. 30, 2013

December 30, 2013
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court was posted after IL deadline Friday:
Joseph & Jeanne Hutcherson v. Robin L. Ward, Hamilton County Assessor
Tax. Denies Hamilton County assessor’s motion to dismiss the Hutchersons’ claims and reverses the Indiana Board of Tax Review’s determination that the Hutchersons’ petitions to correct error for 2004 through 2007 were untimely. Finds the Petition to Correct Error Statute contains no provisions limiting the length of time a taxpayer has to file a petition. Remands for action consistent with the court’s opinion.

Monday's opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals
Rico Nathaniel Morst v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms revocation of Morst’s probation.

Jeremiah Joseph Skirvin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms aggregate sentence of 55 years for two counts of sexual misconduct with a minor, as Class B felonies; one count of sexual misconduct with a minor, as a Class C felony; and being adjudicated as a habitual offender.

State of Indiana v. Tammy Sue Harper (NFP)
Criminal. Reverses order from the Tippecanoe Circuit Court modifying the sentence of Harper. Although the prosecuting attorney did not tell the trial court whether it approved of or objected to the sentence modification, the COA held that according to the “clear language” of Indiana Code 35-38-1-17, the prosecutor must approve of a sentence modification if the convicted person has served more than 365 days of his or her sentence.

George Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of attempted murder as a Class A felony.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of D.M. (Minor Child) and D.D. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms termination of father D.D.’s parental rights.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court did not post any opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals did not submit any Indiana opinions by IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.