ILNews

Opinions Jan. 19, 2011

January 19, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Anthony L. Smith v. Gilbert Peters, et al.
10-1013
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, Chief Judge Richard Young.
Civil. Reverses District Court’s dismissal of Smith’s civil rights suit alleging prison employees violated his First and Eighth Amendment rights. Prison officials who recklessly expose a prisoner to a substantial risk of a serious physical injury may have violated a prisoner's Eighth Amendment rights and therefore are subject to those remedies that aren’t barred by 42 U.S.C. Section 1997e(e). Also, if the facts alleged in the complaint are true, Smith may have been punished for complaining about mistreatment. Remands for further proceedings.  

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jeffrey Allen Rowe v. Indiana Dept. of Correction
46A03-1009-SC-444
Small claims. Dismisses interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s ruling on a motion filed by Rowe of a verified petition for an order waiving all or partial filing fees and court costs. The appellate court lacks jurisdiction because the small claims court’s ruling on his verified petition is not an interlocutory order appealable as a matter of right under Appellate Rule 4(A)(1), and because Rowe did not request a discretionary appeal pursuant to App. R. 14(B).

Leo Machine & Tool Inc., et al. v. Poe Volunteer Fire Dept. Inc., et al.
02A03-1003-PL-143
Civil plenary. Grants rehearing and affirms original opinion in full with the addition that the appellate court now also affirms the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Anderson Excavating on the same legal grounds.

Christina Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1003-CR-153
Criminal. Grants petition for rehearing and clarifies that Smith’s sentence should be revised to four years, with two years suspended to supervised probation.

Kathy Lynch v. Daryl and Elizabeth Ackerman (NFP)
37A03-1004-CC-193
Civil collection. Reverses judgment in favor of the Ackermans on Lynch’s complaint alleging breach of contract.

Jamie S. Weddle v. State of Indiana (NFP)
53A01-1006-CR-313
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony rape and Class B felony aggravated battery. Vacates conviction of Class D felony criminal confinement.

George Sheffer v. Gayle Sheffer n/k/a Gayle J. Curtiss (NFP)
45A05-1009-DR-543
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of George Sheffer’s motion to correct error.

State of Indiana v. Michael Williams (NFP)
49A02-1004-CR-412
Criminal. Reverses in part the court’s grant of Williams’ motion to suppress. Remands for further proceedings. Judge Riley dissents.

Frank E. Willis v. Keith Holder (NFP)
33A05-1009-CT-577
Civil tort. Affirms order granting summary judgment for Holder on Willis’ complaint for negligence.

Michael P. Wright v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A05-1006-CR-412
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony resisting law enforcement.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

 
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT