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. 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