ILNews

Opinions Feb. 27, 2013

February 27, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Lamont Holloway v. State of Indiana
49A02-1207-CR-548
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony burglary and Class D felony theft. The evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.

In the Matter of the Paternity of G.W., J.W. v. R.M.

22A01-1205-JP-234
Juvenile. Reverses denial of mother’s two motions to dismiss the paternity action commenced by R.M. R.M. cannot serve as G.W.’s next friend, and R.M. failed to timely register with the Putative Father Registry, so he impliedly consented to the adoption of his minor child and is now barred from establishing paternity.

Midwest Minerals, Inc. v. Fred L. Wilson, Rick Jenkins, Joseph Kenworthy, Michael Tewell, and James Clayton, et al.

84A04-1205-MI-258
Miscellaneous. Affirms judgment in favor of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Area Plan Commission of Vigo County and the Board of Commissioners of Vigo County on Midwest Minerals’ complaint alleging inverse condemnation and seeking damages. The trial court didn’t err when it concluded that the 17-month period from the time that the public water condition was implemented until it was reversed did not constitute inverse condemnation.

Storm Damage Specialists of America d/b/a America's SDS Construction, Inc. v. Melissa A. Johnson and Michael B. Johnson

64A03-1209-CT-386
Civil tort. The trial court properly entered judgment in favor of the Johnsons after Storm Damage Specialists collected an insurance check and failed to perform any work on the Johnsons’ roof. Finds the court erred when it ordered Storm Damage Specialists to pay four times the $4,224.78 compensatory damages amount. Remands with instructions the trial court award treble damages and reduce the total judgment award by $4,224.78.

Paula Tackett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A05-1205-CR-267
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for Class A felony dealing in methamphetamine and Class B felony conspiracy to commit dealing.

Michael Chambers v. State of Indiana (NFP)

53A01-1209-CR-401
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor but remands to the trial court with instructions to impose concurrent sentences.

Jason A. Cafouras v. State of Indiana (NFP)
16A01-1208-CR-347
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor of driving while suspended.

Michael Merriweather v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1204-CR-159
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felonies robbery and attempted robbery, Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license and Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license. Remands with instructions to correct the abstract of judgment and chronological case summary because they contain clerical errors.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT