Opinions Feb. 15, 2013

February 15, 2013
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
South Shore Baseball, LLC d/b/a Gary South Shore Railcats, and Northwest Sports Venture, LLC v. Juanita DeJesus
Civil tort. Reverses denial of summary judgment for South Shore Baseball on DeJesus’ lawsuit filed after she was hit by a foul ball at a game. As a matter of law, the appellants can’t be held liable for her injuries. Remands with instructions for the court to issue summary judgment in favor of South Shore Baseball.

Amanda Vaughn v. State of Indiana

Criminal. Reverses order Vaughn perform 40 hours of community service in lieu of paying court costs and a fine after pleading guilty to Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass. The trial court lacked statutory authority to impose a community service requirement in lieu of costs and fees. Remands for the court to address the imposition of costs and fees in this case. Judge Baker dissents.  

Amy Jean Kristoff v. Centier Bank
Trust. Affirms grant of summary judgment for the bank, the trustee of the Amy Jean Kristoff Exempt Trust, in Kristoff’s action to modify the terms of the trust established by her late mother. Rejects the premise of Kristoff’s argument that the purpose of the trust was to provide for Sally Kristoff’s non-existent grandchildren.

VFW Post 2953, et al. v. City of Evansville and Evansville Common Council (NFP)
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of the fraternal organizations’ petition for injunctive relief and a declaratory judgment that a city ordinance prohibiting smoking violates the Indiana Constitution.

Shawn J. Lee v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Vacates conviction of Class D felony theft and remands for further proceedings.

Misty DeMoss v. Toby Dolan (NFP)

Small claim. Affirms finding that DeMoss acted in direct contempt of court.

Tasha Parsons v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms murder sentence.

Larry J. Briski v. Peoples Bank (NFP)

Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the bank on the bank’s action to enforce a guaranty for $50,000 against Briski.

Courtney A. Wuethrich v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C misdemeanors illegal consumption of alcohol and operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration equivalent to at least 0.08 but less than 0.15.

Dennis White v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms order of maximum and consecutive sentences following a guilty plea to one count each of Class C felony criminal confinement, Class D felony criminal confinement and Class D felony torturing or mutilating a vertebrate animal.

In Re: The Paternity of K.D.; M.G. v. S.D. (NFP)

Juvenile. Affirms modification of custody in favor of father, but reverses order mother must pay $750 toward father’s attorney fees.

Clarence E. Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Pie Kitchen, LLC d/b/a Homemade Ice Cream and Pie Kitchen v. Merchant, LLC (NFP)
Civil collection. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the merchant, awarding it more than $48,000 in damages and interest in a lease dispute.

Brian Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony aggravated battery.

Jesse L. Rose v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms four convictions of Class A felony child molesting and 200-year sentence.

Paul Stieler Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Harbor Bay, et al. v. City of Evansville and Evansville Common Council (NFP)

Civil tort. Affirms denial of the tavern owners request for injunctive relief and a declaratory judgment that an Evansville ordinance prohibiting smoking in certain locations violates the Indiana Constitution.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline. The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by 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