ILNews

Opinions July 26, 2010

July 26, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Mark Ciesiolka
09-2787
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Rudy Lozano.
Criminal. Reverses conviction of knowingly attempting to persuade, induce, entice, and coerce a minor to engage in sexual activity. Because the District Court failed to explain its ruling that the four-factor test for introducing evidence of prior acts under Rule 404(b) was satisfied, and since the evidence introduced in unconstrained fashion is perhaps excessively prejudicial in light of its probative value, reverses and remands for a new trial. Judge Ripple dissents.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Brian D. Brough
88A01-0911-CV-550
Civil. Reverses trial court order granting Brough’s request to vacate order for arbitration. Brough’s contractual obligation to arbitrate his Fair Credit Reporting Act claim against Green Tree was not invalidated by his bankruptcy discharge. Brough’s bankruptcy proceeding has ended, so arbitration of his FCRA claim will not jeopardize the bankruptcy case or affect Brough’s bankruptcy discharge. The contract’s arbitration clause was not terminated by Brough’s bankruptcy discharge. Remands with instructions to order the parties to arbitrate Brough’s FCRA claim.

Leonard Townsend Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1004-PC-251
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

B.H. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A05-1002-JV-58
Juvenile. Affirms B.H.’s placement at the Department of Correction.

A.T.J. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-0912-JV-582
Juvenile. Affirms order A.T.J. be placed in the custody of the Department of Correction.

Frank W. Jackson III v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-0907-CR-303
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.

A.B., Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; K.J. v. I.D.C.S. and Child Advocates (NFP)
49A02-1001-JC-35
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms finding A.B. is a child in need of services.


Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court didn’t grant any transfers for the week ending July 23.

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. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  2. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  3. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  4. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

ADVERTISEMENT