ILNews

Opinions June 2, 2011

June 2, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Larry Ault v. State of Indiana
49A04-1008-CR-492
Criminal. Reverses conviction of felony murder and remands for a new trial. There was sufficient evidence, without Ault’s testimony, to support a jury instruction on self-defense.

Shepherd Properties Co., d/b/a ShepCo Commercial Finishes v. International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, District Council 91
49A04-1010-PL-676
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of ShepCo’s motion to correct error challenging an order awarding attorney fees to International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, District Council 91 as the prevailing party in an action under the Indiana Access to Public Records Act. The trial court erroneously imposed upon ShepCo joint and several liability for statutory attorney fees under the APRA as there is no provision for the assessment of attorney fees against a private party in the event of improper nondisclosure under the act. Remands for further proceedings.

David W. Johnson and Priscilla Johnson v. Madison Regatta, Inc., and American Boat Racing Association (NFP)
39A01-1008-CT-398
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for Madison Regatta and American Boat Racing Association on the Johnsons’ complaint for damages after Priscilla was injured after being hit by a car while watching the regatta.

Estate of Maurice Kendrick, Sr., Susan K. Kussart, as Guardian of B.K. v. Estate of Maurice Kendrick, Sr., Crystal Burke-Potts, et al. (NFP)
46A03-1007-ES-361
Estate supervised. Reverses determination that B.K. failed to prove she is an heir of the deceased, Maurice Kendrick Sr. Remands with instructions.

Stephen Ray Jones, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1006-CR-702
Criminal. Affirms sentences for Class C felony dealing in marijuana and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Kem Linn v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1010-CR-1293
Criminal. Affirms sentences following guilty plea to Class C felonies corrupt business influence and fraud on a financial institution, and five counts of Class C felony forgery.

Herman Cecil Mallory v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1007-PC-493
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Jason L. Prater v. State of Indiana (NFP)
08A05-1009-CR-595
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony intimidation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

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