ILNews

Opinions July 17, 2012

July 17, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Darrell Larue Brown v. State of Indiana
10A04-1109-CR-551
Criminal. Affirms Brown’s sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class B felony child molesting. Brown waived his right to appeal.

Anthony W. Browning v. State of Indiana
49A05-1110-CR-540
Criminal. Affirms five convictions of Class C felony child exploitation. There is sufficient evidence to support Browning knowingly disseminated child pornography.

Mark Gaither v. Indiana Dept. of Correction, et al.
18A02-1111-MI-1073
Miscellaneous. Affirms grant of summary judgment in favor of the Indiana Department of Correction and other defendants on Gaither’s claim that a residency restriction placed on him as a sex offender by the statutes violates the ex post facto clause of the Indiana Constitution. Home ownership does not determine whether a condition restricting residency is permissible. It is permissible to prohibit a sex offender from living within 1,000 feet of a school as a condition of probation.

State of Indiana Military Dept., State Armory Board of the State of Indiana, and Governor Mitch E. Daniels, Jr. v. Continental Electric Co., Inc.
45A05-1109-PL-465
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court judgment in favor of Continental Electric on its claim against the state actors for breach of contract and quantum meruit. The trial court erroneously determined that the state had breached a contract between the state and the subcontractor, which had no contract with the state. The court also erred in concluding Continental Electric was entitled to recover from the state on the basis of quantum meruit.

Kenneth Simmons v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1108-CR-781
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony aggravated battery.

John Doe a/k/a mspbis123, a/k/a Stacy Palombo v. Eve Carson (NFP)
49A05-1201-PL-2
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of Palombo’s partial motion for summary judgment on Carson’s claim of defamation per se. Remands with instructions to enter an order consistent with this opinion.  

Jason E. Hough v. State of Indiana (NFP)
05A04-1107-CR-361
Criminal. Affirms convictions of three counts of Class A felony child molesting but reverses and remands with instructions with respect to Hough’s sentence.

Adrian Hardy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1111-CR-1002
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony dealing in cocaine and Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance. Remands with instructions to correct the abstract of judgment.

Timothy Matson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
04A03-1112-CR-567
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Larry C. Perry, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1112-CR-635
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies criminal confinement, strangulation, two counts of domestic battery, residential entry, and invasion of privacy; Class A misdemeanors interference with the reporting of a crime and resisting law enforcement; and adjudication as a habitual offender.

William M. Steele v. Daniel Callahan (NFP)
84A01-1110-SC-484
Small claim. Affirms denial of Steele’s motion to dismiss and denial of Callahan’s claim for attorney fees. The trial court properly found that inconsistencies in the 2008 and 2009 surveys conducted by Steele proximately caused Callahan and Riggs to incur costs related to the third survey by Myers. The trial court’s findings that Steele’s negligence proximately caused Callahan’s damages regarding the movement of the fence, the 2008 Steele survey, and his initial landscaping costs, were clearly erroneous. Remands with instructions.

Margaret Killion v. Jarrod Kendall, d/b/a Kendall Kontracting and Jarrod Kendall (NFP)

09A04-1109-CT-513
Civil tort. Affirms denial of Killion’s motion to correct error in the ruling that Kendall Kontracting and Kendall did not commit any fraud during Killion’s home improvement project.

In Re: the Paternity of T.P., R.L. and W.M. v. B.P. (NFP)
06A01-1202-JP-38
Juvenile paternity.  Affirms grant of father’s discovery protective order and finding that stepmother did not meet her burden to pursue third-party custody of T.P. Reverse the award of attorney fees.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of K.D., K.B., and B.Y.; and N.D., O.Y., and W.B. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
50A05-1110-JT-568
Juvenile termination. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Garry Balthes v. Concept Industries, Inc., Composite Technologies, LLC, and Shawn Eshragh (NFP)
20A03-1111-CC-517
Civil collection. Reverses in part summary judgment and remands for further proceedings on the sole issue of Balthes’ promissory estoppel defense or claim and affirms in all other respects.

Robert Spears v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1103-PC-110
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Michael Berthiaume v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1111-CR-1018
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony strangulation and Class A misdemeanor battery.

Gregory Hensley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1111-CR-605
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony criminal deviate conduct.

Omnisource Corporation v. David E. Lallow, James Niswonger, Sr., 3 Rivers Metal Recycling, LLC and J & D Real Estate, LLC (NFP)
02A05-1112-PL-627
Civil plenary. Reverses order granting defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment in Omnisource’s action against Lallow, Niswonger, 3 Rivers Metal Recycling and J&D Real Estate for injunctive relief and damages.

Dellia Castile v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1112-CR-583
Criminal. Affirms trial court decision to not reduce bail.

Erik Morales v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A01-1110-CR-554
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony child molesting and one count of Class A felony attempted child molesting.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of: Jo.L. (Minor Child), and J.L. (Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
22A01-1111-JT-542
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Payroll Disbursement Account 2, Inc. v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development (NFP)
93A02-1108-EX-878
Agency appeal. Affirms decision by liability administrative law judge affirming the determination of the department of workforce development that PDA 2 is a partial successor employer of Management 2000 Benefits Inc. for purposes of calculating its unemployment insurance tax contributions.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of: O.H. & J.M. (Minor Children), and C.H. (Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
71A05-1112-JT-707
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Tracy Hertel v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1106-CR-244
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: E.M.R., and V.H. & M.R. v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
71A03-1110-JT-494
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. He TIL team,please zap this comment too since it was merely marking a scammer and not reflecting on the story. Thanks, happy Monday, keep up the fine work.

  2. You just need my social security number sent to your Gmail account to process then loan, right? Beware scammers indeed.

  3. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  4. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  5. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

ADVERTISEMENT