The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Friday.
Indiana Supreme Court
In the Matter of Heather McClure O'Farrell
29S00-0902-DI-76
Discipline. Publicly reprimands O’Farrell for engaging in misconduct by making agreements for and charging unreasonable
fees in violation of Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 1.5(a). She violated the rule by including an improper nonrefundability
provision in her flat fee agreements and by charging and collecting flat fees that were nonrefundable regardless of the circumstances.
Chief Justice Shepard and Justice Rucker dissent as to the sanction, finding a period of suspension without automatic reinstatement
necessary for the protection of clients.
Today’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Cynthia
Kartman, et al. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., et al.
09-1725
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Reverses District Court ruling that a class claim for injunctive relief could proceed under Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure Rule 23(b)(2) and certification of a class to determine whether State Farm should be required to re-inspect policyholders’
roofs pursuant to a uniform and objective standard. There is no contract or tort-based duty requiring the insurer to use a
particular standard for assessing hail damage. Also, the requested injunction is neither appropriate nor final.
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Ryan J. Goens v. State of Indiana
41A01-1006-CR-277
Criminal. Reverses denial of Goens’ motion to suppress. The traffic stop that resulted in his arrest for driving while
intoxicated wasn’t supported by reasonable suspicion.
DBL Axel, LLC v. LaSalle Bank National Association, et al.
15A01-1003-PL-205
Civil plenary. Grants rehearing on the issue of whether the trial court’s order directing turnover of funds in favor
of LaSalle Bank violated DBL’s due process rights to the extent that it had not been determined whether DBL was still
in possession of the funds at the time the trial court issued the order. Holds that, where in question, the court must first
make a factual determination as to the whereabouts of the property. Vacates original opinion, reverses, and remands.
Jeremy James Lahr v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1006-CR-337
Criminal. Affirms convictions of three counts of Class A felony child molesting, two counts of Class C felony child molesting,
one count of Class D felony fondling in the presence of a minor, and one count of Class D felony dissemination of matter harmful
to minors.
Charles Summers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-CR-707
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony strangulation and reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery. Remands
for trial court to vacate battery conviction.
Jeruan L. Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1006-CR-368
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony dealing in cocaine.
Michael P. Singh v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1007-CR-532
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony intimidation.
Sandra McDaniel v. State of Indiana (NFP)
24A01-1005-CR-264
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled
substance.
Jerry Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-CR-708
Criminal. Affirms convictions of four counts of Class A felony criminal deviate conduct.
Auditor of Clark Ct., et al. v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. (NFP)
10A05-1007-PL-418
Civil plenary. Reverses grant of summary judgment for JP Morgan Chase on the county’s complaint seeking recovery of
penalties that the IRS had assessed against it for Chase’s refusal to honor the electronic funds transfer payment requests.
Remands for further proceedings. Judge Baker concurs in result.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
The Indiana Supreme Court granted four transfers and denied 34 for the week ending Feb. 11, 2011.














Never heard of remand to another state. How often does that happen?
I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.