ILNews

Opinions July 19, 2010

July 19, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Isaac Florian and Jeffrey Florian, as limited guardian of Isaac, an adult. v. GATX Rail Corporation
91A04-1002-PL-77
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of GATX Rail Corp. in Issac Florian’s negligence claim after he drove into a GATX tank car that didn’t have retro-reflective sheeting. GATX was in compliance with either retro-reflective implementation schedule even though the train car in question didn’t have sheeting yet. Florian’s common-law negligence claim is preempted by federal regulations set forth in 49.C.F.R. part 224.

A.H. v. State of Indiana
37A04-1002-JV-50
Juvenile. Reverses adjudication A.H. committed what would be exploitation of an endangered adult as a Class A misdemeanor if committed by an adult. The state didn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that A.H. took advantage of Robert Barnhart’s mental and physical condition in securing loans and the State failed to prove that A.H.’s control over Barnhart’s property was unauthorized.

Remon Duke Phillips v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-0912-CR-723
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies strangulation and domestic battery.  

Larry H. Snyder v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1001-CR-138
Criminal. Affirms acceptance of guilty plea to Class B misdemeanor public intoxication.

Joseph Trammell v. State of Indiana
(NFP)
49A05-0912-CR-708
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication.

James Edward Price v. State of Indiana (NFP)
76A03-1001-CR-23
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A dealing in methamphetamine.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of E.L., et al.; M.B. v. I.D.C.S.
(NFP)
48A04-0912-JV-717
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Richard West v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-0912-CR-680
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Jeffery Rowe v. State of Indiana
(NFP)
46A03-0907-CR-344
Criminal. Affirms sentence on remand of an aggregate term of 70 years for Class A felonies robbery and burglary, and finding to be a habitual offender.

Olivia Vanbuskirk v. State of Indiana
(NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1208
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting.

Shawn Christopher McWhorter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-0912-CR-573
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony criminal deviate conduct, and Class C felony robbery.

Andy C. Pitcher d/b/a Liberty Bell v. Berkley Risk Administrators Company, LLC., et al.
(NFP)
81A04-0908-CV-458
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Berkley Risk Administrators Co. on Pitcher’s complaint alleging breach of contract.

Indiana Tax Court
Country Acres Limited Partnership v. Pleasant Township Assessor, and LaPorte County Assessor (NFP)
71T10-0903-TA-5
Tax. Affirms the Indiana Board of Tax Review didn’t err in rejecting an Indiana certified Level II assessor-appraiser’s use of an 11.35 percent capitalization rate. Reverses final determination of the market value-in-use of Country Acres’ complex and remands to the Indiana Board so it may instruct the appropriate assessing officials to assess the subject property consistent with the opinion.
 

The Indiana Supreme Court denied transfer to 22 cases for the week ending July 16.
 

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