ILNews

Opinions July 15, 2010

July 15, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Wednesday.
Indiana Tax Court
Lake County Assessor v. Amoco Sulfur Recovery Corp., BP Products North America, Inc.
49T10-0909-TA-58
Tax. Affirms summary judgment for BP and denial for the Lake County assessor regarding BP’s personal property assessments for 2004 to 2006. Affirms the Indiana Board’s conclusion that BP’s returns substantially complied with the “nature” requirement of both Indiana Code Section 6-1.1-3-9 and 50 IAC 4.2-2-5, and that it was well reasoned, based on substantial evidence, and consistent with the law.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Crisis Connection, Inc. v. Ronald Keith Fromme
19A05-0910-CR-602
Criminal. Affirms order Crisis Connections produce records to the court for an in camera review. An in camera review properly balances Fromme’s constitutional rights and the victims’ interest in privacy.

City of Greenwood, et al. v. Town of Bargersville, Indiana
41A05-0912-CV-684
Civil. Reverses grant of summary judgment for Bargersville in which the court upheld the town’s annexation of 1,847 acres within 3 miles of Greenwood’s city limits and voided Greenwood’s attempted annexation of the land. Greenwood has standing to bring a declaratory judgment action. Reveres because as a matter of law fewer than 51 percent of the territory’s landowners consented to Bargersville’s annexation pursuant to Indiana Code Section 36-43-9. Remands.

Kelly Lee Muncy, Kendra Marie Vondersaar, et al. v. Harlan Bakeries, Inc.
32A04-1001-PL-9
Civil plenary. Affirms findings of fact and conclusions of law entered after remand proceedings, adjusting the prior damages award and ordering that Harlan Bakeries abate certain encroachments. The trial court did not exceed the scope of issues available on remand and the Muncys waived the issue of attorney fees.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of B.G., et al.; M.G., and D.G. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
82A05-1002-JT-60
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Jamestown Homes, Inc. v. Ronald L. Comer (NFP)
02A03-1001-SC-6
Small claim. Affirms grant of Comer’s motion to correct errors.

Teresa M. Mason v. State of Indiana (NFP)
22A01-1003-CR-131
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony reckless homicide.

Indiana Tax Court
AWHR America's Water Heater Rentals, LLC v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue (NFP)
49T10-0710-TA-50
Tax. Affirms the Department of State Revenue’s assessment of sales tax liability against AWHR.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  4. 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

  5. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

ADVERTISEMENT