ILNews

Opinions Jan. 31, 2013

January 31, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Mark S. Weinberger, M.D., et al. v. Gloria Gill
45A05-1203-CT-107
Civil tort. Affirms award of $150,000 in damages to Gloria Gill following her medical malpractice action. Concludes that the testimony concerning Weinberger’s odd behavior before his flight from the country was relevant evidence because it established an inference of consciousness of guilt.

Brian Kendrick v. State of Indiana

49A05-1206-CR-314
Criminal. Affirms sentence on remand of 53-years for Class A felony attempted murder, Class B felony robbery and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license. Even though Kendrick’s sentence for Class A felony attempted murder increased, his aggregate sentence did not change.

Virginia E. Alldredge and Julia A. Luker, as Co-Personal Representatives of the Estate of Venita Hargis v. The Good Samaritan Home, Inc.

82A01-1206-CT-249
Civil tort. Affirms portion of judgment that held fraudulent concealment could operate to toll the Wrongful Death Act’s two-year limitations period, but reverses the court’s conclusion that the plaintiffs had only a reasonable time in which to commence their wrongful death action. The plaintiffs have two years after the concealment is or should have been discovered with reasonable diligence in which to file their claims. Remands for continuation of the underlying litigation.

Paul D. Edwards v. Zobeida E. Bonilla-Vega
53A05-1203-DR-163
Domestic relation. Affirms distribution of marital assets. Because a chose in action is a property right, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it included the husband’s settlement with a former employer in the marital pot.

In Re: The Paternity of A.S.: Melissa Slansky v. Mary Doffin-Syler, and Bradley Howell

64A03-1204-JP-171
Juvenile. Reverses order awarding custody of M.S.’s daughter to the maternal grandmother M.D. The trial court’s judgment isn’t supported by clear and convincing evidence. The trial court shall determine the details of the father’s visitation and determine what, if any, visitation rights are due to the grandmother.

Henry Wagler, Barb Wagler and Henry and Barb Wagler, LP v. Fort Wayne-Allen County Department of Health

02A03-1206-PL-269
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the health department on its claim that the Waglers were required to obtain a construction permit from the department prior to installing their septic systems. Rejects the Waglers’ statutory exemption argument, finding the statute is inapplicable.

Reuban L. Strong, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1205-CR-235
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in work release.

Joseph J. Rheubottom, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1205-CR-244
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea of Class B felony neglect of a dependent.

Bernard Carter, Prosecuting Attorney, Lake County, John Buncich, Sheriff of Lake County, and Indiana Dept. of Correction v. Tim J. Hurd (NFP)
45A04-1206-PL-302
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of injunction enjoining the Department of Correction, Lake County sheriff and Lake County prosecutor from requiring Hurd to continue registering as a sex offender.

Schwala M. Royal v. State of Indiana (NFP)

02A03-1206-CR-292
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class D felony prostitution as well as revocation of probation.

In Re the Termination of the Parent-Child Rel. of N.W. and D.W. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1206-JT-480
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Marvin Willis v. State of Indiana (NFP)

82A01-1206-CR-273
Criminal. Affirms two convictions of Class A misdemeanor driving while suspended.

Steve Pigg v. State of Indiana (NFP)
52A05-1205-CR-318
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Michael A. O'Brien v. State of Indiana (NFP)

65A01-1205-CR-220
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony attempted rape.

Brian Buffington v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1206-CR-297
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony robbery.

In Re the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Rel. of S.F.; C.P. v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)

02A03-1206-JT-275
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Edmond MIller v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1108-CR-721
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct.

Joey Saylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
58A01-1206-CR-269
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation and order that Saylor serve remaining two years of previously suspended sentence.

Richard Keith Lazur v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1207-CR-358
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony attempted residential entry.

Jovan Fitzhugh v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1206-CR-255
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor and orders the trial court to vacate the Class C felony sexual misconduct with a minor conviction.

Melvin Sanders v. State of Indiana (NFP)

02A03-1206-CR-262
Criminal. Affirms 60-year sentence for murder.

Dustin L. Grissom v. State of Indiana (NFP)

11A01-1207-CR-301
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery resulting in bodily injury to a pregnant woman and three counts of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

Darrol Fox v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1206-CR-475
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress evidence.

Keith A. Harlow v. State of Indiana (NFP)

06A01-1206-PC-296
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Torrey Pargo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1207-CR-351
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony intimidation.

Toby Webster v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-CR-522
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony attempted auto theft and adjudication as a habitual offender.

In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of V.M. and M.A. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)

45A03-1205-JT-221
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

French Tibbs v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1205-CR-438
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanors resisting law enforcement and possession of marijuana.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline. The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court did not post any decisions by IL deadline.
 

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. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT