Indiana Supreme Court posted no opinions before IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Daniel
A. Donald v. State of Indiana
23A04-0912-CR-685
Criminal. Reverses and remands trial court’s denial of Donald’s request for a competency evaluation prior to
his probation revocation hearing. Donald contended he was entitled to a competency evaluation pursuant to Indiana statute
and the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The Court of Appeals disagreed with Donald’s statutory
argument, but agreed the Due Process Clause may warrant a competency evaluation prior to a probation revocation hearing.
J.
John Marshall and Marjorie Marshall v. Erie Insurance Exchange a/s/o Cindy Cain
20A03-0908-CV-366
Civil. Granted a petition for rehearing and again affirmed the trial court opinion the Marshalls had a duty to exercise reasonable
care to prevent an unreasonable risk of harm to neighboring landowners arising from the condition of trees on their property
and further held they had breached that duty.
Trevor
Brieger v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0907-CR-617
Criminal. Affirms convictions of rape and criminal deviate conduct as Class B felonies.
Termination
of Parent-Child Relationship of S.H.; A.W. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
76A05-1001-JT-42
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.
Bruce
Gunstra v. Salin Bank and Trust Company (NFP)
49A02-0912-CV-1274
Civil. Affirms trial court’s order granting the motion of Salin Bank and Trust Company for pre-judgment garnishment
of any distributions to Gunstra by two limited liability companies of which he is a member.
Anthony
Phillips v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-0912-CR-1269
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s revocation of probation.
Indiana Tax Court
Indiana
Dept. of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division v. Estate of Katherine S. Boehle, Deceased
49T10-0811-TA-62
Tax. Affirms Marion Probate Court’s denial of the Indiana Department of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division’s
motion to correct error. The issue for review was whether the probate court erred in determining the estate’s inheritance
tax liability regarding a trust that the decedent set up to provide for her son who has Down Syndrome and resides in an assisted-living
facility.
ILNews
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
Longest-practicing female attorney in Indiana has no plans to retire
-
Criminal code and expungement bills signed by governor
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
SCOTUS rules against Indiana farmer in seed patent case
-
Social media sleuths find evidence, but admissibility requires authentication
Court Calendar
-
May 24, 2013 Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Judy Holcomb, Personal Representative of the Estate of Mable Louise Cochran, deceased - 5/24/13
-
May 28, 2013 The Estate of Richard A. Mayer and Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C., v. Lax, Inc., and David Lasco - 5/28/13
-
June 12, 2013 Northern Assurance Company of America v. Thomson, Inc., et al. - 6/12/13
-
June 18, 2013 State of Indiana v. Robert Owens - 6/18/13
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.