ILNews

Opinions Feb. 2, 2012

February 2, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Emergency Services Billing Corp. Inc., individually (and as agent for) agent of Westville Volunteer Fire Department v. Allstate Insurance Co., et al.
11-2381
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division at Lafayette, Judge John E. DeGuilio.
Civil. Affirms dismissal of ESBC’s suit seeking individuals involved in car accidents are responsible for the clean-up costs of hazardous substances released after accidents. A motor vehicle owned for personal use is a “consumer product in consumer use” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, and thus owners/operators of personal motor vehicles are exempt from CERCLA’s response-cost provisions.

Bryan J. Brown v. Elizabeth Bowman, et al.
11-2164
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann
Civil. Affirms District Court’s dismissal of Brown’s complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Because his claims of religious bias require a federal District Court to review the judicial process followed by the Indiana Supreme Court in deciding the merits of Brown’s bar admission application, his claims are “inextricably intertwined” and fall squarely under Rooker-Feldman’s jurisdictional bar. Declines to address whether the District Court was correct in ruling in the alternative that the defendants were immune from suit.

United States of America v. Erik D. Zahursky

11-2054
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Rudy Lozano.
Criminal. Affirms Zahursky’s 210-month sentence imposed by the District Court on remand. Zahursky has forfeited his right to challenge the application of the pseudo-count enhancement under Section 2G1.3(d) on appeal because he failed to raise the issue in his first appeal.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jeffrey Allen Rowe v. William K. Wilson (NFP)
46A04-1109-SC-476
Small claim. Reverses dismissal of Rowe’s claim for failure to pay the filing fee and remands with instructions to impose a filing fee of $0.65.

Eric C. Roach v. State of Indiana (NFP)
62A01-1108-CR-367
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

Alex R. Voils, Jr., Vicki L. Voils v. Everhome Mortgage Co. (NFP)
06A01-1101-MF-66
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms denial of the Voilses’ request to set aside the sheriff’s sale.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of A.C., a minor child, and her Father, D.B.; D.B. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, and Child Advocates, Inc. (NFP)
49A05-1105-JT-286
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Other than a complete lack of any verifiable and valid historical citations to back your wild context-free accusations, you also forget to allege "ate Native American children, ate slave children, ate their own children, and often did it all while using salad forks rather than dinner forks." (gasp)

  2. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  3. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  4. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  5. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

ADVERTISEMENT