Opinions July 5, 2011

July 5, 2011
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Larry E. Snell v. K-Industrial, LLC (NFP)
Collections. Affirms trial court’s judgment in favor of K-Industrial and trial court’s partial summary judgment in favor of Larry Snell. Reverses award of attorney fees to Snell, holding that Snell’s complaint did not arise from his agreement with K-Industrial.

Jasper L. Chastain v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

John Battles v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony auto theft.  

Duron Reese Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony battery.

Michael D. Webb v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms consecutive sentences for two counts of resisting law enforcement.

Christopher C. Craft v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A felony burglary.

Claude R. Fisher v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery.

Kathy Atkinson v. Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (NFP)
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s decision on judicial review affirming the State of Indiana Family and Social Services Administration’s finding that Kathy Atkinson owed $4,956 due to overpayment of food stamp benefits.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Heritage, what Heritage? The New Age is dawning .... an experiment in disordered liberty and social fragmentation is upon us .... "Carmel City Council approved a human rights ordinance with a 4-3 vote Monday night after hearing about two hours of divided public testimony. The ordinance bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, among other traits. Council members Rick Sharp, Carol Schleif, Sue Finkam and Ron Carter voted in favor of it. The three council members opposing it—Luci Snyder, Kevin Rider and Eric Seidensticker—all said they were against any form of discrimination, but had issues with the wording and possible unintended consequences of the proposal." Kardashian is the new Black.

  2. Can anyone please tell me if anyone is appealing the law that certain sex offenders can't be on school property. How is somebody supposed to watch their children's sports games or graduations, this law needs revised such as sex offenders that are on school property must have another non-offender adult with them at all times while on school property. That they must go to the event and then leave directly afterwards. This is only going to hurt the children of the offenders and the father/ son mother/ daughter vice versa relationship. Please email me and let me know if there is a group that is appealing this for reasons other than voting and religion. Thank you.

  3. Should any attorney who argues against the abortion industry, or presents arguments based upon the Founders' concept of Higher Law, (like that marriage precedes the State) have to check in with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program for a mandatory mental health review? Some think so ... that could certainly cut down on cases such as this "cluttering up" the SCOTUS docket ... use JLAP to deny all uber conservative attorneys licenses and uber conservative representation will tank. If the ends justify the means, why not?

  4. Tell them sherry Mckay told you to call, they're trying to get all the people that have been wronged and held unlawfully to sign up on this class action lawsuit.

  5. Call Young and Young aAttorneys at Law theres ones handling a class action lawsuit