ILNews

Opinions July 6, 2011

July 6, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
J.L., Child Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; J.L. v. I.D.C.S.
32A01-1010-JC-532
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms trial court’s finding that mother’s two sons are children in need of services, because of the mother’s repeated unsubstantiated claims that the father was abusing the boys.

James W. Oldham v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1009-CR-974
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony robbery and two counts of Class B felony criminal confinement.

Aaron Aaron v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1101-CR-187
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Nynthia Richardson v. BAC Home Loans Services L.P., et al. (NFP)
27A02-1011-MF-1206
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to set aside a default judgment entered in favor of BAC Home Loans Servicing.

S.R. v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1011-EX-1233
Civil. Affirms decision by Indiana Department of Workforce Development’s Review Board that Stephen Riner voluntarily left employment without good cause and is not eligible for unemployment benefits.

Roy L. Harrison v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1010-CR-1094
Criminal. Reverses trial court’s revocation of probation, holding that a probable cause affidavit was filed improperly and therefore cannot be used to establish an alleged probation violation. Remands for new hearing on probation revocation.

Douglas Mowry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1009-CR-1017
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

Patrick W. Scholl v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1012-CR-663
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to dismiss and affirms court’s authorization of lifetime driver’s license suspension.

Robert Hinton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1012-CR-1330
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of Robert Hinton’s motion to withdraw a guilty plea to Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.




 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  2. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  3. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  4. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  5. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

ADVERTISEMENT