ILNews

Opinions - June 1, 2010

June 2, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Thomas A. Neu, Elizabeth A. Neu, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Brett Gibson
49S02-0910-CV-442
Civil. Affirms trial court’s finding that the Neus were not entitled to interest, attorney fees, and costs and that they could not foreclose on their own home or force a sheriff’s sale of the property. When the Neus purchased their home from John Nowak, the title search did not reveal a mortgage held by Gibson. The Supreme Court also finds the Neus had other options than foreclosing on the home or forcing a sheriff’s sale: they could have sold the house without court action, or taken the matter up with the title insurance company that didn’t find the Gibson mortgage when they bought the home.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Alan Kelly v. Julie Kelly (NFP)
12A05-0912-CV-703
Civil. Affirms marriage dissolution decree entered by the trial court in dissolution proceedings initiated by Julie Kelly. Alan Kelly appealed the entering of the decree based on the following issues: the trial court’s awarding custody of the parties’ minor child to Julie; the trial court’s discretion in dividing the marital property; and the trial court’s discretion in awarding $9,000 to Julie for attorney’s fees.

Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions before IL deadline.

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. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT