ILNews

Opinions July 14, 2011

July 14, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline:
Phillip A. Collins, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. America’s Servicing Co.
10-2962
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Robert Miller Jr.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for America’s Servicing Co. on Collins’ breach of contract claim and claim that ASC violated the Indiana’s Home Loan Practices Act. ASC had the right at all times, under the original contract and both forbearance agreements, to charge Collins late fees and report his late payments. He cannot prove that ASC knowingly or intentionally made a material representation or concealed information because the plain language of the forbearance agreements made clear that all the provisions of the original mortgage applied.

Today’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Nathaniel Josiah Worden
10-3567
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen.
Criminal. Dismisses appeal of District Court’s order that Worden pay approximately $500,000 in restitution to one of the victims of his offense. The restitution order falls within the scope of the appellate waiver in Worden’s plea agreement to one count of advertising child pornography.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Shon L. Edmond v. State of Indiana
49A04-1012-CR-756
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress. Because the police officer had probable cause to arrest Edmond, the pat-down search of him was a valid search incident to arrest and Edmond’s constitutional rights weren’t violated.

James R. Hundley v. State of Indiana

24A01-1010-CR-550
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class A felony dealing in methamphetamine. The evidence is sufficient to show the meth lab belonged to Hundley and that he manufactured more than three grams of adulterated methamphetamine.

Great Lakes Transfer, LLC, et al. v. Porter County Highway Dept., et al.

46A03-1010-PL-554
Civil plenary. Affirms the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review the Porter County Highway Department’s denial of applications for a driveway permit. The highway department’s review of Great Lakes Transfer’s application for a driveway permit was a discretionary administrative act and not a decision subject to judicial review.

Kraig Eric Burgan v. State of Indiana (NFP)

18A05-1012-CR-737
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony child molesting.

Karl Neil Robinson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1011-CR-610
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Sheldon C. McAuley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1011-CR-646
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony battery, Class D felony residential entry, and Class A misdemeanor interference with the reporting of a crime.

James M. Mrozinski v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A04-1004-CR-260
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felonies robbery and burglary.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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