ILNews

Opinions July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Townsquare Media Inc., f/k/a Regent Communications Inc. v. Alan R. Brill, et al.
10-3017, 10-3018
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, Chief Judge Richard Young.
Civil. The decision of the bankruptcy court to remand a suit to state court – which had been removed to the bankruptcy court after being filed in state court – is unreviewable and Regent’s appeal must be dismissed.

L.V. and Yvette Crawford v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc. d/b/a America’s Wholesale Lender, et al.
10-3135
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Chief Judge Philip Simon.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Countrywide Home Loans in the Crawfords' suit following their default on their mortgage, eviction from the home, and sale of the home in a sheriff’s sale. The Crawfords did not meet their burden to come forward with specific facts showing that there were genuine issues for trial. Vacates the District Court’s order of Aug. 10, 2010, and remands for the limited purpose of permitting the District Court to enter a new order specifying which aspects of the Crawfords’ complaint were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds and remanding those aspects to the state court from which the case was removed.

Indiana Supreme Court
Glenn Carpenter v. State of Indiana

49S02-1104-CR-198
Criminal. Revises Carpenter’s sentence from 40 years to 20 years following his conviction of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and being an habitual offender. His sentence is inappropriate given the unaggravated nature of the offense as a whole and his character and past criminal history. Justice Dickson dissents.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jacqueline Wisner, M.D., and the South Bend Clinic, L.L.P. v. Archie L. Laney
71A03-1007-CT-382
Civil tort. Affirms in part and reverses in part in a negligence action. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Laney’s attorney’s actions did not deprive the defendants of a fair trial or in concluding that the trial court instructions were sufficient to dispel any confusion that may have been caused by Laney’s counsel’s final argument. The trial court didn’t err in finding that no impropriety occurred when a witness spoke to other witnesses before trial. Reverses order denying Laney prejudgment interest. Remands for further proceedings.

James Bellamy v. State of Indiana
49A02-1011-CR-1214
Criminal. Affirms finding Bellamy was in direct criminal contempt. Despite his status as a layperson, the trial court did not err in finding he was in direct contempt of the trial court for showing up late to court after being warned. Any challenge to the error relating to the trial court’s failure to allow him to explain his tardiness was waived.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of D.B., et al.; W.B. v. IDCS (NFP)

28A05-1101-JT-22
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Antonio Jenkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
68A01-1008-CR-417
Criminal. Grants rehearing to explain more fully why Jenkins waived the issue of the admissibility of certain evidence under Indiana Rules of Evidence Rule 616.

Michael J. Earnest v. State of Indiana (NFP)
50A03-1011-CR-602
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for one count of Class A felony child molesting, reverses second conviction of Class A felony child molesting, and remands for entry of judgment of conviction of one count of incest as a Class B felony and sentencing on that offense.

Marvin M. Willis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A05-1012-CR-807
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. IF the Right to Vote is indeed a Right, then it is a RIGHT. That is the same for ALL eligible and properly registered voters. And this is, being able to cast one's vote - until the minute before the polls close in one's assigned precinct. NOT days before by absentee ballot, and NOT 9 miles from one's house (where it might be a burden to get to in time). I personally wait until the last minute to get in line. Because you never know what happens. THAT is my right, and that is Mr. Valenti's. If it is truly so horrible to let him on school grounds (exactly how many children are harmed by those required to register, on school grounds, on election day - seriously!), then move the polling place to a different location. For ALL voters in that precinct. Problem solved.

  2. "associates are becoming more mercenary. The path to partnership has become longer and more difficult so they are chasing short-term gains like high compensation." GOOD FOR THEM! HELL THERE OUGHT TO BE A UNION!

  3. Let's be honest. A glut of lawyers out there, because law schools have overproduced them. Law schools dont care, and big law loves it. So the firms can afford to underpay them. Typical capitalist situation. Wages have grown slowly for entry level lawyers the past 25 years it seems. Just like the rest of our economy. Might as well become a welder. Oh and the big money is mostly reserved for those who can log huge hours and will cut corners to get things handled. More capitalist joy. So the answer coming from the experts is to "capitalize" more competition from nonlawyers, and robots. ie "expert systems." One even hears talk of "offshoring" some legal work. thus undercutting the workers even more. And they wonder why people have been pulling for Bernie and Trump. Hello fools, it's not just the "working class" it's the overly educated suffering too.

  4. And with a whimpering hissy fit the charade came to an end ... http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2016/07/27/all-charges-dropped-against-all-remaining-officers-in-freddie-gray-case/ WHISTLEBLOWERS are needed more than ever in a time such as this ... when politics trump justice and emotions trump reason. Blue Lives Matter.

  5. "pedigree"? I never knew that in order to become a successful or, for that matter, a talented attorney, one needs to have come from good stock. What should raise eyebrows even more than the starting associates' pay at this firm (and ones like it) is the belief systems they subscribe to re who is and isn't "fit" to practice law with them. Incredible the arrogance that exists throughout the practice of law in this country, especially at firms like this one.

ADVERTISEMENT