ILNews

Opinions July 16, 2010

July 16, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Tom George, et al. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
09-3667
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Reverses dismissal of the plaintiffs’ entire second amendment complaint alleging the NCAA’s ticket-allocation process is an illegal lottery. Because plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded that the NCAA conducted a lottery, the bona-fide-business-transaction exception to the statutory definition of gambling is of no effect. The District Court erred in holding that the doctrine of in pari delicto bars plaintiffs from seeking relief from the court. Remanded for further proceedings. Judge Cudahy dissents.

Tamika Jones v. Res-Care, Inc. and Shane McFall
09-3076
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Res-Care and McFall in Jones’ suit alleging race discrimination, retaliation, and various state-law claims. Jones’ Title VII claims, with the exception of her retaliation claim, are barred, and affirms summary judgment with respect to the state claims of defamation and vicarious liability. She failed to establish a prima facie case under the direct method on her retaliation claim.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Nathaniel L. Williams v. State of Indiana
18A02-0911-CR-1092
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony dealing in cocaine, one conviction of Class C felony possession of a controlled substance and Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance. Reverses and vacates one Class C felony conviction and remands for the trial court to correct its records to reflect the vacation of the conviction. The admission of the confidential informant’s statements did not violate Williams’ right to confront witnesses. Williams didn’t preserve for appellate review his claim that the trial court failed to properly admonish the jury.

Ruth M. Brown v. Alliance Environmental, Inc. v. R. Bruce Wallace (NFP)
49A02-0909-CV-854
Civil. Reverses part of order that awarded Brown compensatory damages resulting from Wallace’s breach of the fiduciary duty that he owed to Brown and in finding Brown held a 12 percent ownership interest in Alliance at the time of the asset sale in 2005. Remands for further proceedings. Affirms order in all other respects.

Aaron Spears v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1194
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Wendy G. Thomas, as personal representative of the estate of William T. Dollard, deceased v. Carol Sparks Drake, et al. (NFP)
06A05-0907-CV-427
Civil. Grants estate’s petition for rehearing and affirms original opinion affirming summary judgment in favor of Drake.  

D.L. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0908-JV-781
Juvenile. Affirms placement at Kokomo Academy.

Michael Shelton Scott v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1003-CR-235
Criminal. Affirms 40-year sentence for Class A felony child molesting.

Raymond Baird and George M. Cox v. State of Indiana (NFP)
31A01-0910-CR-514
Criminal. Affirms denial of Baird and Cox’s motion for review of numerous claims of error relating to the trial court’s bond schedule and conditions of bond.

Estate of Mary L. Riley and Marjorie R. Potts v. James Riley (NFP)
08A02-1001-ES-33
Estate supervised. Affirms decision in favor of James Riley’s son, trust, and grandchildren.

G.M. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
49A02-1001-JT-13
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

J.M.O. v. J.C.D; J.M.O. v. D.H.M. (NFP)
07A01-0910-CV-478
Civil. Reverses denial of J.M.O.’s petitions for protective orders against her child’s father and his fiancée. Remands for further proceedings.

Aaron R. Ross v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-0911-CR-637
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine, Class C felonies possession of cocaine and a firearm, and carrying a handgun without a license, and three counts of Class D felony possession of a controlled substance.

Joseph Matthews v. City of Indianapolis (NFP)
49A02-1002-CT-110
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment for City of Indianapolis in Matthews’ complaint alleging the city negligently failed to place or replace a stop sign at an intersection and that proximately caused his injuries.

M.L. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1001-JV-68
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication for committing what would be Class D felony possession of cocaine if committed by an adult.

Charles Orr v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A01-0912-CR-603
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to burglary as a Class B felony.

K.W. v. L.C. (NFP)
14A01-0911-CV-542
Civil. Affirms denial of K.W.’s petition to terminate guardianship.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. @ President Snow, like they really read these comments or have the GUTS to show what is the right thing to do. They are just worrying about planning the next retirement party, the others JUST DO NOT CARE about what is right. Its the Good Ol'Boys - they do not care about the rights of the mother or child, they just care about their next vote, which, from what I gather, the mother left the state of Indiana because of the domestic violence that was going on through out the marriage, the father had three restraining orders on him from three different women, but yet, the COA judges sent a strong message, go ahead men put your women in place, do what you have to do, you have our backs... I just wish the REAL truth could be told about this situation... Please pray for this child and mother that God will some how make things right and send a miracle from above.

  2. I hear you.... Us Christians are the minority. The LGBTs groups have more rights than the Christians..... How come when we express our faith openly in public we are prosecuted? This justice system do not want to seem "bias" but yet forgets who have voted them into office.

  3. Perhaps the lady chief justice, or lady appellate court chief judge, or one of the many female federal court judges in Ind could lead this discussion of gender disparity? THINK WITH ME .... any real examples of race or gender bias reported on this ezine? But think about ADA cases ... hmmmm ... could it be that the ISC actually needs to tighten its ADA function instead? Let's ask me or Attorney Straw. And how about religion? Remember it, it used to be right up there with race, and actually more protected than gender. Used to be. Patrick J Buchanan observes: " After World War II, our judicial dictatorship began a purge of public manifestations of the “Christian nation” Harry Truman said we were. In 2009, Barack Obama retorted, “We do not consider ourselves to be a Christian nation.” Secularism had been enthroned as our established religion, with only the most feeble of protests." http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/is-secession-a-solution-to-cultural-war/#q3yVdhxDVMMxiCmy.99 I could link to any of my supreme court filings here, but have done that more than enough. My case is an exclamation mark on what PJB writes. BUT not in ISC, where the progressives obsess on race and gender .... despite a lack of predicate acts in the past decade. Interested in reading more on this subject? Search for "Florida" on this ezine.

  4. Great questions to six jurists. The legislature should open a probe to investigate possible government corruption. Cj rush has shown courage as has justice Steven David. Who stands with them?

  5. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

ADVERTISEMENT