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

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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT