ILNews

Opinions Jan. 14, 2011

January 14, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
John M. Stephenson v. Bill Wilson, Superintendent of Indiana State Prison
09-2924
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Order. Petition for rehearing en banc is denied. Panel previously reversed District Court’s finding that Stephenson received ineffective assistance of counsel because the attorney didn’t object to Stephenson’s wearing a stun belt in court. Judges Rovner, Williams, and Hamilton dissent.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Indiana Spine Group, P.C. v. International Entertainment Consultants
93A02-1007-EX-764
Civil. Reverses dismissal of Indiana Spine Group’s application for adjustment of claim with the Worker’s Compensation Board. Indiana Code Section 22-3-3-3 doesn’t apply to Indiana Spine’s claim. Remands for further proceedings.

Orlando Quezare v. Byrider Finance, Inc.
29A02-1008-PL-944
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for Byrider Finance on Quezare’s suit that his bonus payments were “wages” under the Wage Payment Statute and Byrider violated the statute by not paying him his bonuses within 10 days of the date they were earned. The bonuses were not wages for the purposes of the statute because they were not directly related to the amount of time Quezare worked, were not necessarily paid regularly, and the bonus program was discretionary.

Alexander Orta v. State of Indiana
71A05-1004-CR-210
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for felony murder, Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a controlled substance in the blood, and Class C felony failure to stop at the scene of an accident resulting in death of another person. The trial court acted within its discretion with regard to each of Orta’s alleged errors, the trial court properly applied the Indiana Supreme Court’s opinion in Sanchez, and Orta’s sentence is appropriate.

Christopher Brian Neal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
07A01-1007-CR-331
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and aggregate 65-year sentence for felony murder and Class B felony robbery.

Nanci Lacy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-OV-528
Local ordinance violation. Affirms permanent injunction order impounding any animal Lacy owned and prohibiting her from owning or keeping an animal in Marion County.

Gregory Withers, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A04-1006-CR-419
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony nonsupport of a child.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of N.J.; J.J. and A.D. v. I.D.C.S., St. Joseph County office (NFP)
71A04-1004-JT-209
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Douglas P. Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
92A03-1004-CR-222
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to sever child molesting charges from sexual misconduct with a minor charges.

Jay F. Vermillion v. Indiana State Prison Disciplinary Body and Westville Control Unit (NFP)
46A03-1008-SC-409
Small claims. Affirms grant of motion to dismiss Vermillion’s complaint alleging his disciplinary sanction and the confiscation of his television were in violation of Department of Correction policy.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT