ILNews

Opinions Jan. 12, 2012

January 12, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Michael Redmond and Charles Avery Jr.
10-1947, 10-3914
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, Chief Judge Richard L. Young.
Criminal. Affirms denial of Avery’s request to withdraw his guilty plea to crack cocaine distribution, the calculation of the crack cocaine quantity attributed to him and his sentence. Remands for the District Court to reconsider Redmond’s sentence following a guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of 50 grams of cocaine base in light of United States v. Corner.

Indiana Supreme Court
Keith M. Ramsey, M.D., The Methodist Hospitals, Inc. v. Shella Moore
45S05-1105-CT-281
Civil tort. Holds that because the trial court’s order dismissing the portion of Moore’s proposed complaint dealing with the death of the fetus but refusing to dismiss her complaint in its entirety based on the lateness of her submission is not a final appealable judgment, there is no subject matter jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The trial court order did not dispose of all the claims as to all parties.

Thomas Dexter v. State of Indiana
79S05-1106-CR-367
Criminal. Reverses Dexter’s habitual-offender sentencing enhancement and holds that an unsigned judgment is not sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the fact of a prior conviction. Holds that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment doesn’t bar the state from retrying Dexter on the habitual offender enhancement. Summarily affirms the Indiana Court of Appeals in all other respects.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jason Quinn v. Accurate Builders (NFP)
93A02-1108-EX-698
Agency appeal. Affirms decision of the Full Worker’s Compensation Board denying application for adjustment of claim.

Robert Weybright v. Kathy Weybright n/k/a Kathy Scaggs (NFP)
43A03-1105-DR-191
Domestic relation. Affirms determination that Kathy Weybright was not in contempt of a court order, that Robert Weybright maintain health insurance for the parties’ minor daughter, and that Kathy retain sole custody of the daughter. Remands for the court to modify its order so that Robert isn’t required to reimburse Kathy for certain bills.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT