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

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. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT