ILNews

Opinions Feb. 10, 2011

February 10, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Killbuck Concerned Citizens Association v. J.M. Corporation and Ralph Reed
48S00-1003-PL-158
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court grant of J.M. Corporation’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that Indiana Code Section 13-20-2-11, which would require further review and approval of zoning, violated the Indiana Constitution and remands for further proceedings. Declines to decide the constitutional issue, but finds because J.M. Corporation’s facilities accepted wasted before April 1, 2008, Indiana Code Section 13-20-2-11 doesn’t apply.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Christine and Ivan Kolozsvari v. John Doe, M.D., Jane Doe, R.N., Kelley Branchfield, R.Ph., and Hook SuperX, LLC
32A04-1008-CT-525
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment against the Kolozsvaris and in favor of Kelley Branchfield and Hook Super X (CVS) in the Kolozsvaris’ suit alleging negligence and loss of consortium after Christine took a prescribed drug that caused kidney failure and the pharmacist disregarded warnings about drug interactions. In light of the evidence, CVS and Branchfield had a duty of care to Christine to either warn her of the side effects of the drug or to withhold the medication in accordance with Indiana Code Section 25-26-13-16 and Pharmacy Board rule 1-33-2. Remands for further proceedings.

Beneficial Indiana, Inc. v. Joy Properties, LLC
02A05-1005-PL-260
Civil plenary. Reverses order to the Allen County treasurer and auditor that it disburse to Joy Properties the surplus funds from a tax sale of real estate in Fort Wayne that Beneficial had an interest in. Beneficial has a more substantial interest in the real estate and that equity requires disbursement of the tax surplus funds to Beneficial.

Nexus Group Inc. v. Heritage Appraisal Service and Alan Landing
46A03-1007-PL-418
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Heritage Appraisal Service and Landing in Nexus’ complaint for defamation per se, defamation per quod, and punitive damages. It is undisputed that Heritage’s statements related to a matter of public interest and that Nexus failed to designate any evidence showing that Heritage acted in bad faith or without a reasonable basis in law and fact when it made its statements in the letter. Remands for a hearing on appellate attorney fees.

Charles E. Justise, Sr. v. Jerry Huston, et al. (NFP)
77A01-1009-MI-511
Miscellaneous. Affirms dismissal of Justise’s pro se complaint against Jerry Huston and Karen Richards alleging they denied him access to legal research materials while he was in the Wabash Valley Correctional facility.

Ernest Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1006-CR-339
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony attempted theft and Class B misdemeanor unauthorized entry of a motorized vehicle.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of B.B. & M.B.; K.A. & B.B. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
33A01-1007-JT-379
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parent-child relationship.

Willie G. Pargo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-CR-573
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine, Class C felony possession with a firearm, and Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Charles Durham v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1006-PC-363
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Stephan D. Parks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-CR-631
Criminal. Affirms sentence for voluntary manslaughter as a Class A felony.

Daniel A. Demaree v. State of Indiana (NFP)
55A01-1005-CR-295
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for five counts of Class A felony child molesting.

Rextori Pizza, et al. v. Dutch Mill Plaza, LLC (NFP)
90A02-1008-CC-920
Civil collections. Affirms order entering final judgment in favor of Dutch Mill Plaza on its complaint against Rextori for breach of contract and on Rextori’s counterclaims for wrongful eviction and conversion. Remands for a hearing on appellate attorney fees.

Douglas Alan Baker, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
42A01-1006-CR-320
Criminal. Affirms conviction of maintaining a common nuisance as a Class D felony.

James McMahon v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1004-CR-416
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony child molestation.

Michael A. Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
53A01-1001-CR-24
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony aggravated battery.

L.P. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-JV-766
Juvenile. Reverses order modifying probation and suspended commitment and remands for further proceedings.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

 
 

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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT