ILNews

Opinions Jan. 30, 2013

January 30, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Peter F. Amaya v. D. Craig Brater, M.D., in his capacity as Dean and Director of Indiana University School of Medicine; The Board of Trustees of Indiana University; et al.
49A04-1204-PL-208
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the medical school on Amaya’s claims including breach of contract and breach of good faith and fair dealing after he was dismissed from the school. Amaya didn’t designate evidence that the school’s decision was in bad faith, arbitrary or capricious.

Matthew Banks Ashworth v. Kathryn (Ashworth) Ehrgott

49A02-1205-DR-412
Domestic relation. Reverses in part and remands with instructions to apply the income allocation factor of 0.1549 to father’s 2012 and future bonuses and correct a scrivener’s error in the April 24, 2010, income withholding order and calculate credit owed to father and its repayment method. Affirms in all other respects, including calculation of father’s 2012 and subsequent weekly child support obligations.

Christopher Smith v. State of Indiana

18A02-1204-CR-331
Criminal. Reverses conviction of failure to immediately report child abuse or neglect as a Class B misdemeanor. The state needed to present evidence which proved the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt, and not merely present facts which tend to arouse suspicion of guilt, in order to support a conviction and show that Smith had reason to believe, as defined by the Legislature, that G.G. was a victim of child abuse and that Smith then knowingly failed to immediately report such abuse. Judge Vaidik dissents.

Jill R. Kincer v. State of Indiana (NFP)

36A01-1207-CR-324
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

David Arndell v. State of Indiana (NFP)

82A04-1206-CR-333
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft and 20-month sentence.

John D. Rogers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
88A01-1208-PC-373
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Kerry L. Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1111-PC-519
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Demetrius Walker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1205-CR-380
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

James A. Crouch v. State of Indiana (NFP)
53A05-1208-CR-417
Criminal. Affirms sentence following finding that Crouch violated several conditions of a drug treatment program.

Monique Rowe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1204-JM-165
Juvenile. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor failure to ensure school attendance.

Fernando Seba v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1207-CR-556
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony child molesting and two counts of Class C felony child molesting.

Noah Shane Warren v. State of Indiana (NFP)
63A01-1204-CR-165
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine and Class D felony neglect of a dependent as well as a habitual offender enhancement, but reverses conviction of Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance.

Michael Ramos v. Robertson's Apartments (NFP)
71A03-1203-SC-107
Small claim. Grants petition for rehearing to address a point Ramos raises regarding waiver for damages in excess of the small claims jurisdictional limit and affirms original decision in all respects.

Hobert Pittman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
31A01-1204-PC-158
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Kindred Nursing Centers, LTD Partnership d/b/a Wedgewood Healthcare v. Linda Davis (NFP)
93A02-1207-EX-553
Agency action. Affirms Worker’s Compensation Board’s determination that Davis’ injury arose out of her employment.

 

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. If real money was spent on this study, what a shame. And if some air-head professor tries to use this to advance a career, pity the poor student. I am approaching a time that i (and others around me) should be vigilant. I don't think I'm anywhere near there yet, but seeing the subject I was looking forward to something I might use to look for some benchmarks. When finally finding my way to the hidden questionnaire all I could say to myself was...what a joke. Those are open and obvious signs of any impaired lawyer (or non-lawyer, for that matter), And if one needs a checklist to discern those tell-tale signs of impairment at any age, one shouldn't be practicing law. Another reason I don't regret dropping my ABA membership some number of years ago.

  2. The case should have been spiked. Give the kid a break. He can serve and maybe die for Uncle Sam and can't have a drink? Wow. And they won't even let him defend himself. What a gross lack of prosecutorial oversight and judgment. WOW

  3. I work with some older lawyers in the 70s, 80s, and they are sharp as tacks compared to the foggy minded, undisciplined, inexperienced, listless & aimless "youths" being churned out by the diploma mill law schools by the tens of thousands. A client is generally lucky to land a lawyer who has decided to stay in practice a long time. Young people shouldn't kid themselves. Experience is golden especially in something like law. When you start out as a new lawyer you are about as powerful as a babe in the cradle. Whereas the silver halo of age usually crowns someone who can strike like thunder.

  4. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  5. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

ADVERTISEMENT