ILNews

Opinions Feb. 7, 2014

February 7, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
The following opinion was issued after IL deadline Thursday.

Gary W. Helman v. Bruce Duhaime, et al.
12-3428
Civil. Affirms summary judgment in favor of defendants in a civil rights suit alleging police used excessive force when they shot Gary Helman, ending an armed standoff that began when authorities attempted to serve a warrant for his arrest at his home in Cromwell. Helman’s § 1983 complaint cannot survive summary judgment because he pleaded guilty to a class D felony count of resisting law enforcement in which evidence showed authorities only fired after Helman reached for his firearm.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

In the Matter of the Adoption of A.A. and L.A., J.B. and S.B. v. R.C. and N.C. (NFP)
48A04-1304-AD-176
Adoption. Affirms trial court order granting maternal grandparents visitation with adopted children.

Cynthia M. Alvey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
07A01-1307-CR-328
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C misdemeanor driving while intoxicated.

Steven Percifield v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1307-CR-329
Criminal. Affirms order to serve 18-month suspended sentence for probation violation after a conviction of Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

In Re the Guardianship of Ruth Carter, an Incompetent Adult, Colleen F. Batt v. Marsha K. Moore (NFP)
91A02-1306-GU-538
Guardianship. Affirms establishment of guardianship.

John Joseph Ramsey II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A04-1306-CR-275
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

In Re: Adoption of L.A.C. and S.T.A., S.C. and L.A. v. N.C. and K.R. (NFP) 
48A02-1305-AD-462
Adoption. Affirms adoption of minor children without parental consent.

Patsy Moore d/b/a/ Cat Dog Trucking v. Roger Jerrell (NFP)
93A02-1308-EX-693
Agency action. Affirms order awarding worker’s compensation benefits.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT