ILNews

Opinions Jan. 12, 2011

January 12, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Amorita N. Thomas, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. H&R Block Eastern Enterprises Inc.
10-1482
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge David Hamilton.
Affirms summary judgment in favor of H&R Block in Thomas’ suit under Indiana’s Wage Payment Statute for paying its end-of-season compensation more than 10 days after it was earned. Concludes that the end-of-season compensation is not a wage under the statute because it was depending on other factors than her efforts and it would be highly difficult for the company to calculate it within 10 days. Declines to send a certified question on the issue to the Indiana Supreme Court.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Beck's Superior Hybrids, Inc. v. Monsanto Company, et al.
29A05-1008-MI-489
Miscellaneous. Reverses order that Beck’s comply with the arbitration panel’s subpoena. Section 7 of the Federal Arbitration Act preempts Indiana Trial Rule 28(E) and Monsanto’s lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction to enforce its subpoena doesn’t justify ignoring the plain text of Section 7. Remands with instructions that the court dismiss Monsanto’s petition to assist. Judge Baker dissents.

Brian Reese v. State of Indiana
64A03-1001-CR-18
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony attempted murder, Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement, and carrying a handgun without a license, elevated to a Class C felony due to a prior offense. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting evidence of uncharged bad acts, there is sufficient evidence to support his conviction of attempted murder, and he was properly sentenced. The use of “attack” in jury instruction Final Instruction 26 is at most a harmless error in light of the testimony that Reese deliberately fired multiple shots at the police officer.

Alesa Pack v. Indiana Family and Social Services Administration

89A05-1004-PL-240
Civil plenary. Grants rehearing for the sole purpose of clarifying the correct application of Administrative Orders and Procedures Act to Medicaid determinations regarding recipients and applications. Clarifies that while the AOPA applies to judicial review of Medicaid determinations, separate rules apply to the review of such decisions by an administrative law judge as they pertain to recipients of and applications for Medicaid benefits. Affirms original decision in all respects. Judge Riley voted to deny petition for rehearing without opinion.

Glenn L. Carpenter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-CR-521
Criminal. Affirms conviction of unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon as a Class B felony, adjudication as a habitual offender, and sentence imposed.

Lucas T. Scholl v. State of Indiana (NFP)
07A01-1004-CR-166
Criminal. Affirms conviction of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, endangering a person as a Class A misdemeanor.

Camiell Chest v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-CR-544
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony domestic battery.

Wesley D. Willis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1005-CR-304
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony voluntary manslaughter, Class A felony attempted murder, and two counts of Class C felony criminal recklessness.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT