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. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  2. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  3. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  4. 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

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT