ILNews

Opinions Feb. 19, 2013

February 19, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Ronald B. Hawkins v. State of Indiana
20S03-1208-DR-499
Domestic relation. Vacates convictions of two counts of Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent where Hawkins was tried in absentia. The record indicates that Hawkins’ failure to appear at trial did not constitute a waiver of his right to counsel. Remands for a new trial.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Ernesto Roberto Ramirez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1204-CR-224
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder and Class D felony criminal gang activity.

Brandon E. Klein v. State of Indiana (NFP)

79A02-1201-CR-38
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for Class D felony intimidation and Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of S.K.W. and D.L.W.J.: D.W. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services and Lake County Court Appointed Special Advocate (NFP)
45A03-1206-JT-293
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Thomas Clements v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1205-CR-200
Criminal. Reverses denial of verified petition to limit access to criminal history and vacates the trial court order.

Olie McNeal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1207-CR-364
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Megan Parker v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A05-1206-CR-327
Criminal. Affirms conviction of carrying a handgun without a license as a Class A misdemeanor.

Bradley Franks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1205-CR-256
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Daniel Miller v. State of Indiana (NFP)
88A01-1205-CR-228
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony burglary and Class B felony rape.

Tyrone Frazier v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1202-PC-113
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Metropolitan Property & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Gary Darland (NFP)
53A01-1204-PL-179
Civil plenary. Affirms a covered loss under the MetLife policy occurred and the trial court properly awarded Darland $42,370 for the total loss of a boat and trailer. Reverses loss of use damages to Darland for the 2010 boating season.

Ricky L. Flake v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A05-1207-CR-356
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony operating a vehicle after suspension.

Luke White v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-CR-477
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony aggravated battery and Class C felony battery.

Anthony E. Thomas v. State of Indiana (NFP)

20A03-1208-CR-377
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in work release center.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Mr. Ricker, how foolish of you to think that by complying with the law you would be ok. Don't you know that Indiana is a state that welcomes monopolies, and that Indiana's legislature is the one entity in this state that believes monopolistic practices (such as those engaged in by Indiana Association of Beverage Retailers) make Indiana a "business-friendly" state? How can you not see this????

  2. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  3. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  4. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  5. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

ADVERTISEMENT