ILNews

Opinions June 11, 2012

June 11, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrint

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had issued no opinions by IL deadline.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
IP of A West 86th Street 1, LLC, et al., v. Morgan Stanley Worldwide Capital Holdings, LLC
11-2891
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Affirms District Court’s summary judgment in favor of Morgan Stanley, holding that the company was entitled to structure the sale of a loan as it wished and that the company did not err in allowing a purchaser to use escrow funds to finance the sale.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael Phelps v. State of Indiana
55A01-1108-CR-410
Criminal. Affirms 35-year sentence with five years suspended for a minor convicted as an adult of a Class A attempted murder for the school shooting of a classmate, holding that the sentence did not lead to an inference of gross disproportionality.

Delmas Sexton II v. State of Indiana
02A03-1110-CR-465
Criminal. Affirms 65-year sentence for a murder conviction in a Fort Wayne killing, holding that the trial court’s consideration of aggravating factors that resulted in a longer sentence was not double jeopardy or punishment for charges that had been dropped in a plea agreement.

Canon Harper v. State of Indiana
10A01-1012-CR-687
Criminal. Affirms on rehearing convictions of dealing in cocaine, possession of cocaine, dealing in a narcotic drug, and possession of a narcotic drug, all Class A felonies; two counts of resisting law enforcement, battery of a law enforcement officer, and possession of paraphernalia, all Class A misdemeanors; and maintaining a common nuisance, a Class D felony. The court ruled Harper constructively possessed the contraband.

David S. Healey v. State of Indiana
02A04-1110-CR-537
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentences for Class C felony failure to register as a sex offender and registering on a social media site that is used by people under age 18. Holds that amendments to Indiana’s Sex Offender Registry Act that require 10-year registration upon release from incarceration do not violate the state or federal Constitution because the registry is not intended to be punitive.

Michael L. Criss v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A05-1111-CR-632
Criminal. Affirms order revoking community corrections placement and committing Criss to the Indiana Department of Correction for a Class C felony battery conviction.  

Ron Weathers v. Jessica Turley (NFP)
45A03-1109-CT-405
Civil tort. Reverses jury’s award of $86,250 in damages to Turley, holding that a list she provided the court showing losses contained no factual information and included items of no real monetary value. Remands for the court to award damages of $3,000.

Sucharita Ananthaneni v. Access Therapies, Inc. (NFP)
49A02-1109-PL-902
Civil plenary. Dismisses appeal of order denying motion to reconsider the refusal to set aside a default judgment entered in favor of Access Therapies, holding the appeal was not timely filed.

Steven G. Fraley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
76A03-1112-CR-565
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s order revoking probation.

Karen D. McGuinness v. Michael F. McGuinness (NFP)
49A02-1110-DR-937
Domestic relation. Reverses trial court’s decision setting aside the decree of dissolution of marriage and property settlement agreement, holding that the court erred in concluding the husband had entered into the agreement and signed other documents under duress because it failed to address the husband’s petition alleging fraud. Remands for further proceedings.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: C.K. and R.K. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
20A04-1110-JT-534
Juvenile. Affirms termination of father’s parental rights.
 

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. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT