ILNews

Opinions Jan. 4, 2011

January 4, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

USA v. Timothy Redd
09-3799
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann
Criminal. Affirms District Court’s denial of Redd’s successive §3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence. Redd’s sentence was reduced from 405 months to 327 months after the Sentencing Commission made the reduction in the guideline ranges for crack offenses retroactive. In a motion filed 10 months after his sentence was reduced, Redd claimed his reduction was not as much as it should have been. 7th Circuit concludes Redd let the time for reconsideration or appeal of the district judge’s resentencing expire without action.

Indiana Supreme Court posted no opinions before IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of D.S., et al.; D.H. & D.S. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
20A04-1006-JT-377
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parent-child relationship of D.H. (mother) and D.S. (father) and their eight children.

Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions before IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court granted one transfer and denied three for the week ending Dec. 31, 2010.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. IF the Right to Vote is indeed a Right, then it is a RIGHT. That is the same for ALL eligible and properly registered voters. And this is, being able to cast one's vote - until the minute before the polls close in one's assigned precinct. NOT days before by absentee ballot, and NOT 9 miles from one's house (where it might be a burden to get to in time). I personally wait until the last minute to get in line. Because you never know what happens. THAT is my right, and that is Mr. Valenti's. If it is truly so horrible to let him on school grounds (exactly how many children are harmed by those required to register, on school grounds, on election day - seriously!), then move the polling place to a different location. For ALL voters in that precinct. Problem solved.

  2. "associates are becoming more mercenary. The path to partnership has become longer and more difficult so they are chasing short-term gains like high compensation." GOOD FOR THEM! HELL THERE OUGHT TO BE A UNION!

  3. Let's be honest. A glut of lawyers out there, because law schools have overproduced them. Law schools dont care, and big law loves it. So the firms can afford to underpay them. Typical capitalist situation. Wages have grown slowly for entry level lawyers the past 25 years it seems. Just like the rest of our economy. Might as well become a welder. Oh and the big money is mostly reserved for those who can log huge hours and will cut corners to get things handled. More capitalist joy. So the answer coming from the experts is to "capitalize" more competition from nonlawyers, and robots. ie "expert systems." One even hears talk of "offshoring" some legal work. thus undercutting the workers even more. And they wonder why people have been pulling for Bernie and Trump. Hello fools, it's not just the "working class" it's the overly educated suffering too.

  4. And with a whimpering hissy fit the charade came to an end ... http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2016/07/27/all-charges-dropped-against-all-remaining-officers-in-freddie-gray-case/ WHISTLEBLOWERS are needed more than ever in a time such as this ... when politics trump justice and emotions trump reason. Blue Lives Matter.

  5. "pedigree"? I never knew that in order to become a successful or, for that matter, a talented attorney, one needs to have come from good stock. What should raise eyebrows even more than the starting associates' pay at this firm (and ones like it) is the belief systems they subscribe to re who is and isn't "fit" to practice law with them. Incredible the arrogance that exists throughout the practice of law in this country, especially at firms like this one.

ADVERTISEMENT