ILNews

Opinions July 2, 2013

July 2, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Tequita Ramsey v. Lightning Corporation
49A02-1209-CC-705
Civil Collection. Affirms the trial court’s judgment in decertifying the class. In this case of first impression, the COA noted it could find no logical reason to hold that a trial court may never revoke or rescind an order certifying a class. To do so would mean that once a class action is certified, the class could not be later decertified even if facts and evidence discovered afterward suggests the class should not have been certified in the first place.

Frederick L. King v. State of Indiana
02A03-1212-CR-515
Criminal. Affirms the trial court’s judgment in sentencing Frederick King to 10 years with six years suspended to probation for robbery as a Class B felony. In a per curiam decision, the COA found the sentence was not inappropriate under Appellate Rule 7(B).

Fireworks West International, et al. v. David Prim, et al. (NFP)
49A04-1211-CT-582
Civil tort. Affirms denial of summary judgment in favor of David Prim, et al.

Iris Newt v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1211-CR-503
Criminal. Affirms jury conviction of Class D felony theft and entrance of judgment and sentence as Class A misdemeanor theft.

Charles Hall v. State of Indiana (NFP)

75A03-1107-PC-331
Post conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief for a conviction of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

Steven C. Cupery v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1212-CR-547
Criminal. Affirms two-year sentence for conviction of Class D felony possession of cocaine pursuant to an agreement that dismissed an unrelated criminal case.

Darryl Crenshaw and Krisean Porter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1210-CR-859
Criminal. Affirms denial of petitions for restricted disclosure of arrest records on dismissed charges.

Maria Torres v. Lovisa Enders (NFP)

49A02-1302-CT-122
Reverses and remands trial court order dismissing Maria Torres’ negligence claim against Lovisa Enders, holding that the trial court erred and should have granted summary judgment in favor of Torres on the issue of whether the complaint was timely brought. The court orders the complaint reinstated.

Fred L. Froeschke and Judith A. Froeschke v. City of Vincennes (NFP)

42A04-1301-PL-29
Civil plenary. Affirms order granting summary judgment in favor of the city of Vincennes.

Dwight A. Washington v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1211-CR-559
Criminal. Affirms convictions of multiple counts of child molestation.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court issued no opinions prior to IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana decisions prior to IL deadline.

 

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. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT