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. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT