Opinions Feb. 15, 2011

February 15, 2011
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court posted no opinions before IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
K.D., et al. Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; S.S. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, et al.
Juvenile. Reverses and remands juvenile court’s adjudication that the appellant-respondent’s stepchildren were children in need of services. Concludes that where, as here, one party admits to CHINS allegations while another denies them, due process entitles the contesting party to a fact-finding hearing and adjudication. The mother admitted to the allegations in the petition, but the stepfather denied the allegations and requested a fact-finding hearing.

Deborah J. Wise v. David T. Hays, et al.
Civil. Reverses and remands trial court’s grant of the sellers’ Indiana Trial Rule 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim after a buyer filed a complaint against the sellers of real estate for fraud and negligence. Concludes that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the sellers made fraudulent misrepresentations on the sales disclosure form required by statute.

In the Matter of the Guardianship of J.Y., an adult; D.R. v. Carey Services, Inc., Guardian of the Person of J.Y.
Guardianship. Affirms trial court’s designation of Carey Services, Inc. as guardian of J.Y.’s person. D.R. raised one issue for review: whether the trial court abused its discretion when it designated Carey as guardian of J.Y.’s person although Carey, a domestic nonprofit corporation, cannot serve as a domiciliary personal representative of a deceased person’s estate under Indiana law.

Aubrey Davis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction, after a bench trial, of battery, as a Class A misdemeanor.

Billy Ard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Reverses and remands trial court’s denial, in part, of Ard’s motion for earned credit time.
David A. Allen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction following a bench trial for welfare fraud as a Class C felony.
Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of A.L., et al.; E.L. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms termination of mother’s parental rights as to her minor children, M.F.L., M.L., H.L., and A.L.
Stylian Kaltsas v. Paul Harry Kaltsas (NFP)
Civil. Affirms the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to Paul Harry Kaltsas on Stylian Kaltsas’ motion to set aside the 1996 decree dissolving the parties’ marriage.
Tamikka S. Lucius v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentences for causing death while operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of at least 0.15 percent; operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated; and causing serious bodily injury while operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of at least 0.08 percent.
The Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions before IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues