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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT