ILNews

Opinions Jan. 9, 2014

January 9, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Wolf's Marine, Inc. v. Dev Brar
29A02-1303-SC-293
Small claim. Reverses denial of Wolf’s Marine’s motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Dr. Dev Brar. The trial court incorrectly determined that personal jurisdiction over Wolf’s existed in Indiana, and it should have granted the company’s motion to dismiss.

Joel Bowden, Ruby Bowden, Golden Companies, Inc., and Golden Purchasing and Staffing, Inc. v. E.J. Agnew and Golden-AGI, LLC
49A05-1301-PL-23
Civil plenary. Affirms determination that the Bowdens were subject in their individual capacities to the personal jurisdiction of Indiana courts. Holds Agnew’s expert’s testimony was admissible and the trial court did not err in relying on it to award Agnew damages. The Bowdens’ wrongful failure to distribute net revenue in accordance with the 50/50 agreement with Agnew constitutes failure to pay a debt, not criminal conversion, so Agnew is not entitled to treble damages. Remands for correction of the judgment to award damages in the amount of $1,754,278.

James Broxton v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development, the Department of Indiana Workforce Development, and Sodexo
93A02-1301-EX-79
Agency action. Affirms denial of Broxton’s request for unemployment benefits. The review board did not err when it denied unemployment benefits to Broxton pursuant to the provisions of Indiana Code 22-4-3-5.

Jeremy D. Mohr v. Virginia B. Smith Revocable Trust and Virginia B. Smith, as Trustee of the Virginia B. Smith Revocable Trust
43A03-1306-CT-214
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for the trust and Smith in Mohr’s suit seeking damages for serious injuries when one of the two trees supporting a hammock he laid in fell on him and a companion. He was on Smith’s property without her knowledge, permission or invitation.

Steven S. Satterly v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1305-CR-407
Criminal. Affirms order Satterly serve portions of his suspended sentences in two causes.

Anthony A. Outlaw, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1305-CR-250
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony theft.

Anita Lopez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1301-CR-10
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Jayson Chad-Allen George v. State of Indiana (NFP)
03A01-1304-CR-149
Criminal. Affirms convictions and 10-year sentence for Class C felony criminal confinement and Class D felony strangulation.

Timothy L. Sanders, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A05-1304-CR-208
Criminal. Affirms 30-year sentence for Class A felony child molesting.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. 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?

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT