ILNews

Opinions Feb. 16, 2012

February 16, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court

Richmond State Hospital and All Other Similarly Situated State Institutions and Agencies v. Paula Brattain, et al.
49S02-1106-CV-327
Civil. Holds that the back pay recovery of the non-merit employees of the state should be limited in the same manner as the Court of Appeals has set forth for that of merit employees of the state. Remands with instructions to recalculate the non-merit employees’ back pay judgment based upon the time period beginning either 10 days before the complaint or 10 days before the filing of their grievances until the day the state eliminated its split-pay system, and summarily affirms the COA in all other respects.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Raymond Dale Berryhill v. Parkview Hospital
02A04-1108-SC-400
Small claim. Affirms ruling that Parkview was immune from liability based on a statute that covers persons who assist in detentions. Disagrees with Berryhill that the immunity statute doesn’t apply because he wasn’t detained for purposes of the statute until after his wife filed the application for detention.

State of Indiana v. Elvis Holtsclaw
49A02-1108-CR-743
Criminal. Dismisses the state’s appeal of the denial of its motion to correct error following the trial court’s order granting Holtsclaw’s motion to suppress evidence. The state doesn’t have the authority to appeal the denial of its motion to correct error in this case. Judge Baker dissents.

Paternity of I.I.Y.; L.M.M. v. J.B.Y. (NFP)
84A01-1105-JP-236
Juvenile. Affirms conclusion that a change of custody was necessary. Reverses trial court’s child support award and remand with instructions that the trial court consider the relevant evidence when arriving at the child support award.

The Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of J.D. and R.G. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1108-JT-850
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

City of Fort Wayne, Indiana v. Town of Huntertown, Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1107-MI-384
Miscellaneous. Affirms summary judgment for Huntertown. The trial court properly determined as a matter of law that Fort Wayne’s correspondence did not amount to a termination of an agreement regarding the treatment of sewage collected in Huntertown.

Roger L. Bushhorn v. State of Indiana (NFP)
40A01-1107-CR-315
Criminal. Reverses and remands with instructions to revise Bushhorn’s sentence to an aggregate term of 35 years for charges including Class A felony kidnapping. Affirms in all other respects.

Rosewood Management Company, Inc. v. Twyla Smith (NFP)

45A05-1107-CC-447
Civil collection. Affirms entry of judgment on the evidence in favor of Smith in a dispute as to whether Smith had to pay for damages to her apartment following a fire.

Jason B. Forrest v. State of Indiana (NFP)
91A05-1106-CR-324
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea.

Jason J. Kucenski v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1106-CR-353
Criminal. Reverses conviction of neglect of a dependent, but affirms 45-year sentence and conviction of dealing in methamphetamine. Remands for the trial court to vacate the neglect conviction and sentence for that charge.

State of Indiana v. Angela Bennett (NFP)
79A02-1110-PL-952
Civil plenary. Reverses order granting Bennett a restricted driver’s license.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Call it unauthorized law if you must, a regulatory wrong, but it was fraud and theft well beyond that, a seeming crime! "In three specific cases, the hearing officer found that Westerfield did little to no work for her clients but only issued a partial refund or no refund at all." That is theft by deception, folks. "In its decision to suspend Westerfield, the Supreme Court noted that she already had a long disciplinary history dating back to 1996 and had previously been suspended in 2004 and indefinitely suspended in 2005. She was reinstated in 2009 after finally giving the commission a response to the grievance for which she was suspended in 2004." WOW -- was the Indiana Supreme Court complicit in her fraud? Talk about being on notice of a real bad actor .... "Further, the justices noted that during her testimony, Westerfield was “disingenuous and evasive” about her relationship with Tope and attempted to distance herself from him. They also wrote that other aggravating factors existed in Westerfield’s case, such as her lack of remorse." WOW, and yet she only got 18 months on the bench, and if she shows up and cries for them in a year and a half, and pays money to JLAP for group therapy ... back in to ride roughshod over hapless clients (or are they "marks") once again! Aint Hoosier lawyering a great money making adventure!!! Just live for the bucks, even if filthy lucre, and come out a-ok. ME on the other hand??? Lifetime banishment for blowing the whistle on unconstitutional governance. Yes, had I ripped off clients or had ANY disciplinary history for doing that I would have fared better, most likely, as that it would have revealed me motivated by Mammon and not Faith. Check it out if you doubt my reading of this, compare and contrast the above 18 months with my lifetime banishment from court, see appendix for Bar Examiners report which the ISC adopted without substantive review: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS

  2. Wow, over a quarter million dollars? That is a a lot of commissary money! Over what time frame? Years I would guess. Anyone ever try to blow the whistle? Probably not, since most Hoosiers who take notice of such things realize that Hoosier whistleblowers are almost always pilloried. If someone did blow the whistle, they were likely fired. The persecution of whistleblowers is a sure sign of far too much government corruption. Details of my own personal experience at the top of Hoosier governance available upon request ... maybe a "fake news" media outlet will have the courage to tell the stories of Hoosier whistleblowers that the "real" Hoosier media (cough) will not deign to touch. (They are part of the problem.)

  3. So if I am reading it right, only if and when African American college students agree to receive checks labeling them as "Negroes" do they receive aid from the UNCF or the Quaker's Educational Fund? In other words, to borrow from the Indiana Appellate Court, "the [nonprofit] supposed to be [their] advocate, refers to [students] in a racially offensive manner. While there is no evidence that [the nonprofits] intended harm to [African American students], the harm was nonetheless inflicted. [Black students are] presented to [academia and future employers] in a racially offensive manner. For these reasons, [such] performance [is] deficient and also prejudice[ial]." Maybe even DEPLORABLE???

  4. I'm the poor soul who spent over 10 years in prison with many many other prisoners trying to kill me for being charged with a sex offense THAT I DID NOT COMMIT i was in jail for a battery charge for helping a friend leave a boyfriend who beat her I've been saying for over 28 years that i did not and would never hurt a child like that mine or anybody's child but NOBODY wants to believe that i might not be guilty of this horrible crime or think that when i say that ALL the paperwork concerning my conviction has strangely DISAPPEARED or even when the long beach judge re-sentenced me over 14 months on a already filed plea bargain out of another districts court then had it filed under a fake name so i could not find while trying to fight my conviction on appeal in a nut shell people are ALWAYS quick to believe the worst about some one well I DID NOT HURT ANY CHILD EVER IN MY LIFE AND HAVE SAID THIS FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS please if anybody can me get some kind of justice it would be greatly appreciated respectfully written wrongly accused Brian Valenti

  5. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

ADVERTISEMENT