ILNews

Opinions June 24, 2014

June 24, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Tyrone L. Jones v. Richard Brown
12-3245
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Affirms denial of Jones’ petition for habeas relief. Finds his trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective under Strickland.  

Indiana Court of Appeals
Roy Bayer Trust and Penny Harris v. Red Husky, LLC
18A02-1307-PL-581
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Red Husky LLC on its complaint seeking replevin of a Kenworth semi-tractor. The trial court’s award of $10,000 in damages based on deterioration of property value is supported by the evidence, but remands for a determination of whether Red Husky is entitled to additional damages for loss of use.

Willie J. Washington v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1310-CR-427
Criminal.  Affirms sentence for Class C felony corrupt business influence and 20 counts of Class C felony forgery.

Antonio McCaster v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1311-CR-544
Criminal.  Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and habitual offender determination.

Melissa Brandon v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1310-CR-521
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication.

Eric Garver, Brian Garver, and Dawn Shepherd v. IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company (NFP)
64A03-1307-PL-292
Civil plenary.  Affirms the trial court correction determined the policy limit at $250,000 and the homeowner policy excluded further payment of damages claimed by the Garvers.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.

 

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT