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. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT