ILNews

Opinions June 18, 2010

June 18, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Thursday.
Indiana Supreme Court

Christine Dugan v. Mittal Steel, USA, Inc., et al.
45S05-1002-CV-121
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Mittal Steel USA and Jay Komorowski. Of the two alleged occasions of defamation per se at issue, the one asserted in paragraph 7 of Dugan’s complaint does not constitute defamation per se. Although the statement alleged in paragraph 6 of the complaint qualifies as defamation per se, there is no genuine issue of fact undermining the defendants' claim of qualified privilege.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Randyl A. McCauley and Deanna R. McCauley v. James S. Harris and Diane C. Harris
28A04-0907-CV-421
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for the Harrises in their request for a permanent injunction against the McCauleys enjoining them from interfering with the Harrises’ use and enjoyment of a 30-foot wide ingress and egress that runs over the McCauleys’ property. The trial court properly concluded that the Harrises’ use and enjoyment of the easement for ingress and egress includes the right to use the easement in its entirety and to construct a roadway over all or any part of the easement. Also affirms order the McCauleys remove a portion of their pole barn that lies within the Harrises’ easement.
 
KB Home Indiana Inc. v. Rockville TBD Corporation

49A02-0909-CV-881
Civil. Reverses summary judgment for Rockville in KB Home’s negligence complaint. The trial court erred in finding the economic loss doctrine bars the claim. Affirms summary judgment for Rockville on KB’s claims for trespass and nuisance.
 
Christina Cisternino v. Grant Communications Inc. (NFP)
49A05-0912-CV-735
Civil. Affirms dismissal of Cisternino’s complaint against Grant Communications Inc. pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 41(E).
 
Daniel L. Anway v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-0912-CR-578
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for operating a vehicle while intoxicated, misdemeanor resisting law enforcement, and failing to stop after an accident.

Douglas W. Kemp v. State of Indiana (NFP)

87A04-0911-CR-641
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony child molesting following a guilty plea.
 
P.G. v. T.G. (NFP)
22A01-0912-CV-596
Civil. Affirms denial of P.G. (father)’s petition to change custody after T.L.G. (mother) filed a motion to relocate their minor child out of Indiana.
 
James Huesman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
70A03-0911-CR-514
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to remove defendant from Indiana’s Sex Offender Registry.
 
Timothy E. Strowmatt v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-0910-PC-587
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief.

Jerome McKinney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-0911-CR-642
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary and finding McKinney to be a habitual offender.
 
Adrian Cole v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-PC-1183
Post-conviction. Affirms sentence received for four convictions of conspiracy to commit forgery, all as Class C felonies.
 
Anthony Emmett Collett v. Kelly Jean Collett (NFP)
89A05-0912-CV-728
Civil. Affirms trial court order declining jurisdiction and deferring jurisdiction of Anthony Collett’s initial child custody determination action to a Minnesota court.
 
Sherrie K. Hansen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1002-CR-63
Criminal. Affirms convictions of five counts of Class D felony theft.
 
State of Indiana v. John W. Holler (NFP)
57A03-0910-CR-462
Criminal. Affirms denial of state’s motion to correct error.
 
C.E. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development (NFP)
93A02-0906-EX-526
Civil. Affirms decision of Indiana Unemployment Insurance Review Board that affirms the findings and conclusions of an administrative law judge who denied C.E.’s application for unemployment benefits.

Bob Gasich v. East Chicago Redevelopment Comm. (NFP)

45A03-0910-CV-500
Civil. Affirms trial court’s denial of Gasich’s “petition to void and withdraw the order of appropriation of real estate and appointment of appraisers.”
 
Mark Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-0908-CR-486
Criminal. Dismisses Taylor’s appeal following revocation of his probation finding the presented issue is moot.
 
Kerwin M. Ward v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-0912-CR-581
Criminal. Affirms sentence for two counts of battery upon law enforcement officer, one count of battery by bodily waste, one count of resisting law enforcement, and one count of disorderly conduct.
 
Linda Ruth Parks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-1001-CR-21
Criminal. Affirms aggregate 30-year sentence for Class B felony burglary with a habitual offender enhancement.
 
Angel Abarca v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0910-CR-1018
Criminal. Affirms sentence following a plea of guilty to aggravated battery, a Class B felony.
 
Bray A. Tibbs v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-0911-CR-541
Criminal. Affirms Tibbs’ conviction of and sentence for burglary as a Class B felony; remands with instructions to vacate restitution order.
 
Bernard Arvin v. Capital One Bank (NFP)
53A04-0909-CV-509
Civil. Affirms trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Capital One Bank.
 
FK Inc. v. See USA LLC (NFP)
56A05-0911-CV-654
Civil. Reverses trial court’s award of $82,514.50 in damages and $85,778.35 in attorney fees to See USA on its claim that FK committed check fraud. Also reverses award of $204,499.58 in lost profits damages to See USA on its breach of contract claim against FK. Remands for further proceedings.
 
William T. Casbon v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-0910-CR-588
Criminal. Affirms post-conviction court’s dismissal of motion to vacate sexually violent predator status.
 
Patsy C. Battin v. Curtis R. Battin (NFP)
03A04-0912-CV-715
Civil. Affirms trial court’s denial of Patsy C. Battin’s request for spousal maintenance. Reverses the trial court’s decision to divide the net marital estate equally, and remands with instructions to order a 60/40 split of the net marital estate in Patsy Battin’s favor; reverses trial court’s denial of her request for attorney’s fees; and remands with instructions to order Curtis Battin to pay 50 percent of her attorney’s fees.
 
Darren A. Snyder v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-0910-CR-600
Criminal. Reverses and remands with instructions to vacate a conviction of battery as a Class A misdemeanor and hold a new trial.
 

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