ILNews

Opinions Feb. 1, 2012

February 1, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:

Amber Parker, et. al., v. Franklin Community School Corporation, et. al.
10-3595
Civil. Reverses U.S. District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants, holding Parker has shown a genuine question of fact about whether the disproportionate scheduling of boys’ basketball games on weekends and girls’ basketball games on weeknights is discriminatory under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. Section 1681(a). Further reverses on the court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ equal protection claim and remands for proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Today’s opinions:

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Mitchell & Stark Construction Company, Inc. v. Strand Associates, Inc., as successor In interest to Sieco, Inc. (NFP)
36A04-1103-CT-79
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Strand Associates.

Cleverson J.R. Punturi v. State of Indiana (NFP)
63A04-1106-CR-339
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony sexual battery, but remands with instructions to the court to revise sentence to three years, with half of that served on probation and half served on work release, finding the sentence was inappropriate because the victim suffered no physical harm.

 

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT