ILNews

Opinions Feb. 1, 2013

February 1, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Eugene Devbrow v. Dr. Eke Kalu, et al.
12-2467
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Larry J. McKinney.
Civil. Reverses judgment for the defendants on prisoner Devbrow’s suit that two prison doctors and a prison nurse were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The statute of limitations for a Section 1983 deliberate-indifference claim brought to redress a medical injury doesn’t begin to run until the plaintiff knows of his injury and its cause, so his suit is timely.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Travis Koontz v. State of Indiana
29A05-1202-CR-77
Criminal. Grants rehearing to correct a misstatement of the law, but affirms original opinion that held Koontz waived any claim of an illegal sentence by entering into a plea agreement that reduced his penal exposure. Judge Baker would reverse as previously stated in his dissenting opinion.

Judy Canada v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., Bank of America, N.A., BAC GP, LLC, and BAC Home Loans Services, LP (NFP)
49A05-1203-PL-154
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of a motion to reconsider filed by Bank of America in which the trial court reaffirmed its dismissal of Count I of Canada’s class action brought as a Complaint For Fraud on the court and dismissed Count II, which contained an allegation of violations of the Indiana Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Alvino Pizano v. IDOC Commissioner Bruce Lemmons, IDOC Parole Chairman Gregory Server, CIF Superintendent Wendy Knight (NFP)
48A02-1209-MI-770
Miscellaneous. Affirms dismissal of lawsuit.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: Se.L.; N.L.; G.L.; J.L.; Sh.L.; L.L.; & I.L. (Minor Children), and D.L. (Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
48A02-1207-JT-537
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Christopher Hanneman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
67A05-1207-CR-344
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief.

Theresa Pressinell v. State of Indiana (NFP)

20A03-1206-CR-267
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of dealing in methamphetamine as Class A felonies.

Larry Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1111-CR-602
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct error.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I'm not sure what's more depressing: the fact that people would pay $35,000 per year to attend an unaccredited law school, or the fact that the same people "are hanging in there and willing to follow the dean’s lead in going forward" after the same school fails to gain accreditation, rendering their $70,000 and counting education worthless. Maybe it's a good thing these people can't sit for the bar.

  2. Such is not uncommon on law school startups. Students and faculty should tap Bruce Green, city attorney of Lufkin, Texas. He led a group of studnets and faculty and sued the ABA as a law student. He knows the ropes, has advised other law school startups. Very astute and principled attorney of unpopular clients, at least in his past, before Lufkin tapped him to run their show.

  3. Not that having the appellate records on Odyssey won't be welcome or useful, but I would rather they first bring in the stray counties that aren't yet connected on the trial court level.

  4. Aristotle said 350 bc: "The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.

  5. Oh yes, lifetime tenure. The Founders gave that to the federal judges .... at that time no federal district courts existed .... so we are talking the Supreme Court justices only in context ....so that they could rule against traditional marriage and for the other pet projects of the sixties generation. Right. Hmmmm, but I must admit, there is something from that time frame that seems to recommend itself in this context ..... on yes, from a document the Founders penned in 1776: " He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."

ADVERTISEMENT