ILNews

Opinions June 29, 2012

June 29, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Zachary Medlock v. Trustees of Indiana University, et al.
11-3288
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt.
Civil. Dismisses Medlock’s appeal of the denial of his request for a preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of a one-year suspension from the school. The appeal is moot because the 7th Circuit cannot grant any effectual relief.

Indiana Supreme Court
Walter Lyles v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass. At trial, there was evidence that the defendant was neither an owner nor an employee of the bank as well as evidence that the bank manager had authority to ask customers to leave the bank premises. This evidence, taken together, refuted each of the most reasonably apparent sources from which a person in the defendant's circumstances might have derived a contractual interest in the bank's real property: as an owner, as an employee, and as an account holder. Justice Rucker dissents.

Indiana Court of Appeals
City of Carmel v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Greg Park
93A02-1108-EX-841
Agency appeal. Reverses decision by the review board that Park was discharged, but not for just cause. The city of Carmel demonstrated that police officer Park’s actions were in violation of its rules and that his arrest of a juvenile, under the circumstances, constituted a failure to obey a lawful order under the employer’s rules.

T.B. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services
79A04-1110-JT-594
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights. Declines mother’s invitation to depart from the clear and unambiguous language of Indiana’s termination statute in order to judicially legislate an exception whereby mentally handicapped parents are immune from involuntary termination proceedings.

Doug Wynkoop v. The Town of Cedar Lake, Indiana, and the Town Council of the Town of Cedar Lake, Indiana
45A05-1111-PL-602
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Wynkoop’s former employer on the issue of whether he possessed a constitutionally protected property interest in his position with the town of Cedar Lake so that he was entitled to due process before he was fired. The procedural manual emphasizes the at-will nature of the employment. Chief Judge Robb concurs in result with opinion.

Jeffrey A. Weisheit v. State of Indiana
10A01-1202-CR-58
Criminal. Affirms denial of bail for Weisheit, who is charged with two counts of murder and one count of Class A felony arson and faces the death penalty. Weisheit failed to meet the burden of proof that the state’s case against him is not strong enough to allow him to post bail.

Jennifer A. Kreegar v. Fifth Third Mortgage Company (NFP)
34A02-1110-MF-940
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms denial of motion to correct errors and summary judgment ruling in favor of Fifth Third Mortgage Co.

Jack Haut v. State of Indiana (NFP)
75A05-1109-CR-512
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony reckless homicide.

John Hollins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1109-PC-553
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Louis Board v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1111-CR-581
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

Michael W. Pine, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1111-CR-588
Criminal. Affirms sentence for dealing in methamphetamine as a Class B felony and three counts of Class C felony neglect of a dependent.

Reuben Garcia v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A05-1112-CR-646
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony dealing in marijuana.

Harold L. Tice, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A04-1110-PC-631
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Joseph A. Taylor v. Sgt. Rinehart (NFP)
48A02-1110-PL-993
Civil plenary. Affirms dismissal of complaint alleging the Pendleton Correction Facility’s disciplinary procedures denied Taylor certain rights.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.C., Minor Child; C.C., Mother v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, and Lake County Court Appointed Special Advocate (NFP)
45A04-1110-JT-591
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Kenneth Lainhart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
24A04-1105-CR-299
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for Class B felonies conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and manufacturing methamphetamine.

In Re: The Marriage of L.R. v. J.R. (NFP)
45A04-1110-DR-526
Domestic relation. Affirms dissolution decree that ordered J.R. to pay $368 a week in child support, divided the marital property, found L.R. in contempt for willfully violating a provisional order, and ordered the parties pay their own attorney fees.

P.T. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1111-JV-1063
Juvenile. Reverses adjudication as a delinquent child for committing what would be Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass when committed by an adult.

Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Can I get this form on line,if not where can I obtain one. I am eligible.

  2. What a fine example of the best of the Hoosier tradition! How sad that the AP has to include partisan snark in the obit for this great American patriot and adventurer.

  3. Why are all these lawyers yakking to the media about pending matters? Trial by media? What the devil happened to not making extrajudicial statements? The system is falling apart.

  4. It is a sad story indeed as this couple has been only in survival mode, NOT found guilty with Ponzi, shaken down for 5 years and pursued by prosecution that has been ignited by a civil suit with very deep pockets wrenched in their bitterness...It has been said that many of us are breaking an average of 300 federal laws a day without even knowing it. Structuring laws, & civilForfeiture laws are among the scariest that need to be restructured or repealed . These laws were initially created for drug Lords and laundering money and now reach over that line. Here you have a couple that took out their own money, not drug money, not laundering. Yes...Many upset that they lost money...but how much did they make before it all fell apart? No one ask that question? A civil suit against Williams was awarded because he has no more money to fight...they pushed for a break in order...they took all his belongings...even underwear, shoes and clothes? who does that? What allows that? Maybe if you had the picture of him purchasing a jacket at the Goodwill just to go to court the next day...his enemy may be satisfied? But not likely...bitterness is a master. For happy ending lovers, you will be happy to know they have a faith that has changed their world and a solid love that many of us can only dream about. They will spend their time in federal jail for taking their money from their account, but at the end of the day they have loyal friends, a true love and a hope of a new life in time...and none of that can be bought or taken That is the real story.

  5. Could be his email did something especially heinous, really over the top like questioning Ind S.Ct. officials or accusing JLAP of being the political correctness police.

ADVERTISEMENT