ILNews

Opinions Feb. 29, 2012

February 29, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Joseph A. Davis v. Herbert Simon and Bui Simon
49A04-1101-CT-5
Civil tort. Reverses denial of Davis’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction a complaint filed by the Simons alleging defamation and false light publicity. Davis’ act of responding to the questions of a reporter who initiated the contact with Davis regarding a California lawsuit, in which he is serving as a plaintiff’s attorney, was not done with the purpose of expressly targeting a resident of the forum state. Judge Kirsch dissents.

Engineered Steel Concepts, Inc., ESC Group Limited, and Tom Anderson v. General Drivers, Warehousemen, and Helpers Union Local 142, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and Steven Parks
45A04-1106-CT-287
Civil tort. Affirms dismissal of Engineered Steel Concepts and Tom Anderson’s complaint against the union and Steven Parks for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The trial court properly determined that it had been divested of its subject matter jurisdiction over the state law claims.

State of Indiana ex rel. Family and Social Services Administration v. Estate of Phillip Roy
33A04-1105-ES-246
Estate, supervised. Reverses in part the order that denied the FSSA’s claim against the estate of Phillip Roy for Medicaid expenses incurred by Roy during his lifetime. The FSSA’s claim was not time barred and it has a preferred claim under Indiana Code 12-15-9-1. Remands with instructions. Judge Barnes concurs in part and dissents in part.

Kevin B. Perry v. State of Indiana
30A01-1107-CR-327
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony sexual battery. While Perry’s actions are reprehensible, they don’t qualify for sexual battery as defined by Indiana statute. Remands with instructions for the conviction to be entered as Class B misdemeanor battery and Perry be sentenced to 180 days incarceration with 90 days suspended.

Monte Hanna and Kim Hanna v. Indiana Farmers Mutual Insurance Company
18A04-1106-PL-305
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in Indiana Farmer’s favor that it was not obligated to pay the Hannas under their underinsured motorist provision of their policy. The Child Wrongful Death Act, the Indiana Supreme Court’s interpretation of the CWDA, and the Hannas’ insurance policy do not entitle the parents to bring more than a single joint claim for their son’s death. Also, the parents have already received amounts from the other drivers’ insurers that exceeded the maximum to which they would have been entitled under the UIM provisions of the Indiana Farmers policy.

Charles A. Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1107-CR-376
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony attempted criminal confinement.

Mark Yoder and Barbara Yoder v. Capital One Bank, (USA), N.A. (NFP)
43A05-1103-CC-128
Civil collection. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Capital One Bank on a suit for a credit card balance.

Daniel Robert Mola v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1105-CR-206
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony voluntary manslaughter.

Thomas Pine, Individually and as Admin. for the Estate of Helen Pine, Deceased v. Stirling Clinic, Inc., Albert C. Lee, M.D., and Indiana Neurology Specialty Care (NFP)
49A02-1105-CT-382
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for defendants Stirling Clinic and others on a medical malpractice claim.

Anthony Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1108-PC-752
Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for post-conviction relief and remands with instructions to grant the relief and vacate Taylor’s conviction of and sentence for unlawful use of body armor.

D.P.J. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1109-JV-498
Juvenile. Affirms committing D.P.J. to the Indiana Department of Correction for assignment to the Boys’ School.

Calvin J. Spaulding v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1107-CR-346
Criminal. Affirms sentence for three counts of Class A felony child molesting and being a habitual offender.

Felix R. St. Pierre v. Jeannette St. Pierre (NFP)
79A02-1102-DR-137
Domestic relation. Reverses some of the findings in support of the maintenance award, either because the evidence in the record does not support them or because they do not support such an award under Indiana Code Section 31-15-7-2(3). However, the remaining findings support an award of rehabilitative maintenance and the trial court did not enter findings to support the amount of the award. Remands with instructions.

Douglas J. Smith v. Gail Lynnette Smith (NFP)
27A02-1107-DR-642
Domestic relation. Affirms in part and reverses in part the modification of father’s child support obligation. Remands with instructions to calculate his weekly support obligation as set forth in the opinion.

Edwin D. Calligan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1108-CR-400
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Charles Neal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1106-CR-262
Criminal. Affirms classification as a sexually violent predator.

Logan B. Lake v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1106-CR-256
Criminal. Affirms murder conviction.

Antonio Rush v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1106-CR-537
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class A misdemeanor driving while suspended.

Adam Schafer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
55A01-1108-CR-386
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony causing death when operating a motor vehicle with a schedule I or II controlled substance in the blood.

Stacey L. Certain v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1105-CR-264
Criminal. Affirms second probation revocation.

Harley J. Wise, II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
37A03-1108-CC-347
Civil collection. Affirms grant of Discover Bank’s motion for summary judgment for a credit card balance.

Nick Bigsby v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1106-CR-528
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony rape, Class D felony strangulation, and Class A misdemeanor battery.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of J.C.; J.P. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
82A01-1107-JT-325
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.


 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hi there I really need help with getting my old divorce case back into court - I am still paying support on a 24 year old who has not been in school since age 16 - now living independent. My visitation with my 14 year old has never been modified; however, when convenient for her I can have him... I am paying past balance from over due support, yet earn several thousand dollars less. I would contact my original attorney but he basically molest me multiple times in Indy when I would visit.. Todd Woodmansee - I had just came out and had know idea what to do... I have heard he no longer practices. Please help1

  2. Yes diversity is so very important. With justice Rucker off ... the court is too white. Still too male. No Hispanic justice. No LGBT justice. And there are other checkboxes missing as well. This will not do. I say hold the seat until a physically handicapped Black Lesbian of Hispanic heritage and eastern religious creed with bipolar issues can be located. Perhaps an international search, with a preference for third world candidates, is indicated. A non English speaker would surely increase our diversity quotient!!!

  3. First, I want to thank Justice Rucker for his many years of public service, not just at the appellate court level for over 25 years, but also when he served the people of Lake County as a Deputy Prosecutor, City Attorney for Gary, IN, and in private practice in a smaller, highly diverse community with a history of serious economic challenges, ethnic tensions, and recently publicized but apparently long-standing environmental health risks to some of its poorest residents. Congratulations for having the dedication & courage to practice law in areas many in our state might have considered too dangerous or too poor at different points in time. It was also courageous to step into a prominent and highly visible position of public service & respect in the early 1990's, remaining in a position that left you open to state-wide public scrutiny (without any glitches) for over 25 years. Yes, Hoosiers of all backgrounds can take pride in your many years of public service. But people of color who watched your ascent to the highest levels of state government no doubt felt even more as you transcended some real & perhaps some perceived social, economic, academic and professional barriers. You were living proof that, with hard work, dedication & a spirit of public service, a person who shared their same skin tone or came from the same county they grew up in could achieve great success. At the same time, perhaps unknowingly, you helped fellow members of the judiciary, court staff, litigants and the public better understand that differences that are only skin-deep neither define nor limit a person's character, abilities or prospects in life. You also helped others appreciate that people of different races & backgrounds can live and work together peacefully & productively for the greater good of all. Those are truths that didn't have to be written down in court opinions. Anyone paying attention could see that truth lived out every day you devoted to public service. I believe you have been a "trailblazer" in Indiana's legal community and its judiciary. I also embrace your belief that society's needs can be better served when people in positions of governmental power reflect the many complexions of the population that they serve. Whether through greater understanding across the existing racial spectrum or through the removal of some real and some perceived color-based, hope-crushing barriers to life opportunities & success, movement toward a more reflective representation of the population being governed will lead to greater and uninterrupted respect for laws designed to protect all peoples' rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. Thanks again for a job well-done & for the inevitable positive impact your service has had - and will continue to have - on countless Hoosiers of all backgrounds & colors.

  4. Diversity is important, but with some limitations. For instance, diversity of experience is a great thing that can be very helpful in certain jobs or roles. Diversity of skin color is never important, ever, under any circumstance. To think that skin color changes one single thing about a person is patently racist and offensive. Likewise, diversity of values is useless. Some values are better than others. In the case of a supreme court justice, I actually think diversity is unimportant. The justices are not to impose their own beliefs on rulings, but need to apply the law to the facts in an objective manner.

  5. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

ADVERTISEMENT