ILNews

Opinions June 19, 2012

June 19, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Alan Patrick McEntee v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
75A03-1106-MF-277
Mortgage foreclosure. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Wells Fargo and remands to the trial court, holding that the court erred because Wells Fargo failed to establish there was no material fact that McEntee had defaulted; and that Wells Fargo failed to establish the absence of a genuine issue of material fact as to McEntee’s affirmative defense.  

Victoria Peak v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1112-CR-1096
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia.

Jeffrey D. Pruitt v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1110-CR-576
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony criminal recklessness.

Kunta K. Gray v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1111-PC-623
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Robert Sean Morphett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A05-1110-CR-565
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery.

Suzanne Throgmartin v. Gregg Appliances, Inc. (NFP)
84A05-1110-MF-573
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms trial court’s dismissal of Throgmartin’s third-party complaint against Gregg Appliances.

Kimberly S. Lakin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
91A02-1107-CR-655
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia.

Jennifer Alao-Hamed v. Adeniran Alao-Hamed (NFP)
49A02-1110-DR-1017
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s grant of husband’s motion to correct error.

Michael Eward v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1110-CR-934
Criminal. Affirms convictions of one count Class A misdemeanor and one count Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated.  

Shawn Lamont Alexander v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1109-CR-424
Criminal. Affirms sentences for two counts of Class A felony attempted murder and two counts of Class C felony attempted robbery.

Kenneth Watson v. P.C. Operating, LLC d/b/a Mentone Mini Mart, Paladin Global Development, Paladin Commercial LLC and Scientific Games International, Inc. (NFP)
43A04-1202-PL-55
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s dismissal of Watson’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based upon collateral estoppel.

Michael Priddy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
31A01-1110-CR-455
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentences for eight counts of Class B felony child molesting.  

Martin A. Harriman v. Kristina A. Harriman (NFP)
41A01-1111-DR-513
Domestic relation. Reverses trial court’s determination on amount of health care costs owed to Kristina Harriman with instructions to vacate the order requiring Martin Harriman to pay or hold a hearing to determine the correct amount. Affirms in all other regards.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT