ILNews

Opinions June 25, 2012

June 25, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no opinions prior to IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court
Sharon Gill, on her own behalf and on behalf of the Estate of Gale Gill v. Evansville Sheet Metal Works, Inc.

49S05-1111-CV-672
Civil. Reverses trial court ruling for defendant that Gill did not bring her claim within the time Indiana law requires for a claim arising from the construction of an “improvement to real property.” There is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Evansville Sheet Metal Works’ work constituted an “improvement to real property” as that phrase is commonly understood. Holds that for purposes of the construction statute of repose, an “improvement to real property” is a “permanent addition to or betterment of real property that enhances its capital value and that involves the expenditure of labor or money and is designed to make the property more useful or valuable as distinguished from ordinary repairs.”

Indiana Court of Appeals
Steven Brown v. Chris Guinn
22A01-1111-SC-524
Civil plenary. Affirms breach of contract ruling for defendant, holding that the trial court did not err or commit reversible error in its ruling in which a contract was not presented in court, but to which both parties attested.

Jesse Clements v. Ralph Albers (NFP)
49A05-1105-PL-257 & 49A04-1201-PL-9
Civil plenary. Affirms in part and remands in part for further argument on damages awarded on counterclaim.

Casey R. Greene v. State of Indiana (NFP)
07A01-1109-CR-391
Criminal. Affirms trial court convictions for Class C felony dealing in marijuana and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Scott W. Schwichtenberg v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A04-1109-CR-536
Criminal. Affirms trial court conviction on a Class C felony count of incest.

Jeremy W. Lawson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1112-CR-592
Criminal. Affirms in part, reverses in part and remands with instructions to reduce a Class A misdemeanor battery conviction to a Class B misdemeanor and modify sentence accordingly.

Ryan Keith Winchester v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A02-1109-CR-882
Criminal. Affirms trial court conviction on a Class B felony count of burglary.

Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at 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. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT