ILNews

Opinions July 14, 2010

July 14, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Eastern Alliance Insurance Group, Chubb Insurance Group, and Total Interior Systems America, LLC v. Elizabeth Howell

93A02-0912-EX-1287
Civil. Reverses penalties assessed against Eastern Alliance by the Full Worker’s Compensation Board due to a lack of diligence. The board’s factual findings demonstrate that Eastern Alliance reasonably investigated the claim and communicated with the parties, and afterwards it reasonably determined that it was not liable for the claim. Vacates penalties assessed against the company and remands that the board determine and enter an order regarding whether Chubb Insurance should be held responsible for the entirety of the penalty and attorneys’ fees awarded for its lack of diligence.

Paul Christy and Julia Christy v. Paul Sebo and Anita Sebo
55A05-1002-CC-131
Civil. Reverses the order denying the Christys’ request for attorney’s fees and costs against the Sebos in the Christys’ defense of an adverse possession claim and litigation of a breach of warranty claim. Summary judgment was granted in favor of the Christys and against the Sebos on whether the Sebos breached the warranty of title and the Sebos have not appealed that ruling. The fact that the Christys and the Clarks ultimately settled their adverse possession dispute is irrelevant to the question of whether Sebos breached the warranty of title. Remands for further proceedings.

Randy O'Brien, et al. v. C. Bruce Davidson, et al.
49A04-0910-CV-569
Civil. Reverses order granting summary judgment in favor of The Bar Plan Mutual Insurance Co. in Ashby and O’Brien’s legal malpractice action against The Bar Plan’s insured, C. Bruce Davidson Jr. Bar Plan has been able to investigate and defend the clients’ claims against the insured after receiving prompt, actual written notice of the claims from the clients.

Fidelity National Title Insurance Company v. Rhys Mussman and Sally Mussman
64A03-0905-CV-204
Civil. Reveres grant of summary judgment of $1.6 million in favor of the Mussmans on their complaint alleging conversion of funds held in an escrow account by Intercounty Title Company. ITC was Fidelity’s title insurance agent, not its agent for closing and escrow services, so the trial court erred when it held the Mussmans are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Remands with instructions.

Jeannie Hall v. Larry Hall Trust and Jack Hall, Trustee (NFP)
64A05-0912-CV-715
Civil. Affirms determination that Jeannie Hall is not entitled to the income from all of the properties in the Larry A. Hall Trust.

Maurice J. Tatum v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1213
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation.

John Jacob Campbell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-0912-CR-1189
Criminal. Reverses order revoking probation and remands with instructions to the trial court to accommodate Campbell’s indigence consistent with the opinion.

Michael Furlong v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-0911-CR-658
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony burglary and Class D felony theft.

Marcus R. Berry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1002-CR-109
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Johnny Byers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-0910-CR-612
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony attempted murder.

Shalini Kohli v. Vishal Mahajan (NFP)
29A02-1002-DR-131
Domestic relation. Affirms the decree dissolving marriage.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline
.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT