ILNews

Opinions July 22, 2013

July 22, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Thomas Dexter v. State of Indiana
79A04-1212-CR-611
Criminal. Affirms finding by jury after remand that Dexter is a habitual offender and the sentence enhancement of 30 years on his conviction of Class A felony neglect of a dependent resulting in death. The certified transcript from Dexter’s guilty-plea and sentencing hearing is sufficient to prove one of his underlying felony convictions, and his habitual-offender retrial was not barred by res judicata.

Twin Lakes Regional Sewer District v. Robert W. Teumer and Paula K. Teumer
91A04-1212-PL-638
Civil plenary. Reverses judgment regarding the appropriation of two permanent sewer easements and two temporary construction easements on the Teumers’ property. The court-appointed appraisal was improperly admitted, and there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court’s damage award. The trial court correctly directed the clerk to refund Twin Lakes’ overpayment but remands with instructions for the court to enter judgment in the amount of $950 in favor of the Teumers instead of a judgment of $5,000.

Daniel J. Chupp v. Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc. (NFP)
41A04-1302-SC-48
Small claim. Affirms grant of motion to dismiss Chupp’s notice of small claim and the denial of his motion to reconsider. Also denies Wyndham’s request for attorney fees.

Tony Mays v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A04-1301-PC-6
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

William Joseph VanHorn v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1212-CR-992
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for amended abstract of judgment, in which VanHorn requested additional presentence jail credit time.

In Re the Adoption of A.H. and N.H., minor children, D.H., v. A.C.H. (NFP)
17A03-1302-AD-34
Adoption. Affirms the grant of stepmother A.C.H.’s petition to adopt D.H.’s children A.H. and N.H.

Donna M. Brown v. Paul F. Buchmeier and Sally M. Buchmeier d/b/a Fashion Trends (NFP)
33A05-1301-PL-13
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for the Buchmeiers on Brown’s lawsuit alleging breach of duty of care owed to a business invitee by an owner.

Co-Alliance, LLP v. Monticello Farm Service, Inc. (NFP)
91A04-1211-PL-606
Civil plenary. Dismisses appeal by Co-Alliance seeking to challenge a court order favorable to Monticello Farm Service because that order is not a final judgment or an interlocutory order appealable as a matter of right.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT