ILNews

Opinions June 13, 2011

June 13, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Antwon Abbott v. State of Indiana

34A02-1009-CR-1067
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for Class B felony possession of cocaine and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting into evidence the cocaine and marijuana found during the search of Abbott’s person. His argument fails that the statute that elevated his possession crime to a Class B felony is unconstitutionally vague as applied to him.

The City of Boonville v. American Cold Storage, et al.
87A01-1004-PL-167
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court holding that tax-exempt parcels shouldn’t be counted in determining the total number of landowners in the annexed territory. The clear language of Indiana Code 36-4-3-11(a)(1) indicates the Legislature’s intent that all property – whether taxable or tax exempt – should be counted in determining standing. The trial court erred in determining the landowners have standing to bring a declaratory judgment action. Remands for that action to be dismissed. Affirms that adjacent landowners do not have standing to join in the remonstrance under the 65 percent rule.

Khawar Muneer v. Shazi Muneer

32A01-1012-PO-658
Protective order. Affirms denial of Khawar Muneer’s motion to transfer venue. Shazi Muneer filed her petition in the county of her residence, in compliance with Indiana Code 34-26-5-4(b).

Jane D. Connolly v. Michael P. Connolly
02A04-1101-DR-4
Domestic relation. Affirms judgment in favor of Michael Connolly that Jane Connolly isn’t entitled to an equalization payment based on his ownership interest in commercial real estate. The only circumstances in which he would owe an equalization payment would be if the total value of his interest in Bantry Bay had increased. Affirms order that Jane pay a portion of Michael’s attorney fees.  

Yvette Albright v. Four Winds International
93A02-1010-EX-1324
Agency action. Reverses decision of the full Worker’s Compensation Board that Four Winds isn’t responsible for providing prescription Cymbalta to Albright. The evidence shows Albright suffers from paresthesias and Cymbalta helps treat the pain that arises from the condition. Remands for the board to enter an award in favor of Albright, directing Four Winds to provide her with Cymbalta or an equivalent medication to treat her paresthesias and determine how long the company should be required to provide such medication.

Kyle D. Rosenfield v. State of Indiana (NFP)
22A05-1007-CR-648
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony auto theft.

Paternity of B.S.C.; S.C. v. N.A.S. (NFP)
55A04-1012-JP-780
Juvenile. Affirms order on emergency hearing which denied father’s request to modify physical custody.

Robert P. Webber v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1011-CR-647
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony conspiracy to commit burglary.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of D.D.; S.D. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
20A03-1010-JT-506
Juvenile. Affirms order terminating parental rights.
 
Cory Blocker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
31A04-1010-CR-635
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft and revocation of probation.

Richard Bartlett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A04-1012-CR-813
Criminal. Affirms sanction for violating probation.

Henry Howard v. Raymond Grimes, et al. (NFP)
48A04-1010-CC-629
Civil collection. Dismisses Howard’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Warrum Construction Inc., et al. v. Yellow Book Sales and Distribution Co., Inc. (NFP)
49A05-1011-CC-722
Civil collection. Affirms summary judgment for Yellow Book in its complaint seeking payment from Warrum Construction of the balance owed under contracts for advertising.

Alfred M. Wiley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1007-CR-417
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in cocaine and Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license.

Vaughn Highley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A04-1011-CR-710
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony criminal confinement and Class C felony battery resulting in serious bodily injury.
 
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court granted one transfer for the week ended June 10.
 

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. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  2. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  3. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  4. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  5. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

ADVERTISEMENT