ILNews

Opinions June 30, 2011

June 30, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinions were posted after IL deadline Wednesday:
Steven Siwinski, et al. v. Town of Ogden Dunes
64S03-1010-CV-599
Civil. Affirms trial court ruling in favor of the town in its suit against the Siwinskis for violating a town ordinance by renting their home. The ordinance is not ambiguous and the Siwinskis impermissibly rented their dwelling in violation of the ordinance. The fine for this violation should not exceed $32,500. Justice Rucker concurs in a separate opinion. Justice Sullivan dissents, believing the Court of Appeals’ analysis was correct.

Donald A. Pierce v. State of Indiana
13S04-1101-CR-7
Criminal. Revises Pierce’s 124-year sentence for three counts of Class A felony child molesting and one count of Class C felony child molesting to 80 years based on the nature of the offense and Pierce’s character. On remand, the trial court may determine whether and to what extent any portion of the sentence should be suspended to probation. Justices David and Dickson dissent.

Hematology-Oncology of Ind., P.C. v. Hadley W. Fruits, et al.
49S05-1106-CV-387
Civil. Affirms judgment awarding attorney fees and litigation expenses brought under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute. Those fees and expenses are recoverable under the statute but remands to limit the provider’s aggregate liability to the $250,000 cap prescribed by the Medical Malpractice Act. Chief Justice Shepard and Justice Rucker dissent.

Jeffery H. McCabe v. Commissioner, Indiana Dept. of Insurance
49S02-1010-CV-602
Civil. Reverses partial summary judgment for the Department of Insurance on the issue of whether attorney fees are recoverable under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute. Holds that attorney fees are recoverable under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute. Considering the General Wrongful Death Statute and the Adult Wrongful Death Statute in pari materia and warranting harmonious interpretation, finds that the phrase "may include but are not limited to" in the AWDS includes the availability of attorney fees and all other elements of damages permitted under the GWDS. Chief Justice Shepard and Justice Rucker dissent.

Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Beverly S. Brown
49S02-1106-CT-388
Civil. Affirms that sums for the expenses of administration, contingent attorney fees and loss of services are recoverable under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute. Agrees with COA decision that attorney fees, probate administration costs, and litigation costs are compensatory damages that remedy actual pecuniary losses so there’s no reason why these damages shouldn’t be allowed. Chief Justice Shepard and Justice Rucker dissent.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court
Arturo Garcia-Torres v. State of Indiana
64S03-0912-CR-550
Criminal. Affirms convictions of rape, attempted rape, and two counts of burglary. Garcia-Torres’ consent to the swab of his cheek for DNA was voluntary so the swab was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Declines to find Pirtle applies. Justice Rucker dissents.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Enhanced Network Solutions, Inc. v. Hypersonic Technologies
02A03-1011-PL-609
Civil plenary. Affirms order granting Hypersonic Technologies’ request for declaratory judgment that Hypersonic did not violate the terms of the subcontractor agreement. The trial court did not err in finding that Hypersonic did not solicit or induce an employee of Enhanced Network Solutions to terminate his employment in violation of the terms of the subcontractor agreement entered into between Hypersonic and ENS.

Coldwell Banker v. Laub Brothers Oil Co., Inc., et al.
02A05-1003-PL-134
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of Laub Brothers' motion for summary judgment as there is no issue of material fact with respect to whether Coldwell engaged in negotiations with S&S Oil. Affirms denial of judgment on the evidence as Coldwell presented evidence that disputed Laub Brothers' contention that it did not negotiate with S&S Oil. Affirms trial court didn’t err by ruling on its own motion to correct error on the basis that it did not timely file its own motion to correct error. Holds that a new trial on Coldwell’s suit that Laub Brothers wrongfully refused to pay Coldwell a commission is warranted.

David L. Gibbs v. State of Indiana
49A02-1010-CR-1074
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class B felony arson and remands for a new trial. The trial court erred in failing to appoint a psychiatrist to examine Biggs months after his competency hearing, but it was a harmless error because the trial court did not declare him competent to stand trial as a result of the error. The state’s amendment to Gibbs’ charging information was substantive and the trial court erred in allowing the state to amend the charging information after it had read the original charges to the jury.

Edwin Blinn, Jr. v. Rick Kammen and The Law Firm of Gilroy Kammen & Hill (NFP)
27A04-1008-PL-532
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for Kammen in Blinn’s suit for professional negligence.

Michael Carlton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1012-CR-1344
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony escape.

Quanardel Wells v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1008-CR-950
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony intimidation. Affirms imposition of the $250 Sexual Assault Victims Assistance fee, vacates the $100 supplemental public defender fee and remands with instructions that the court hold a hearing on Wells’ ability to pay.

Tina Whiting v. State of Indiana (NFP)
38A05-1008-CR-505
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for felony murder.

Shawn D. Downs v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A02-1011-CR-1246
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent child.

Justin R. Leed v. Melissa A. Leed (NFP)
50A03-1011-DR-593
Domestic relation. Affirms order modifying the marriage settlement agreement.

Mark May v. Ashley F. Ward, Inc. (NFP)
93A02-1011-EX-1323
Agency appeal. Reverses decision by the Full Worker’s Compensation Board denying May’s claim for benefits. Remands for further proceedings.

Jamison A. Brucker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1011-CR-781
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony fraud.

Llewellyn Richardson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1012-CR-820
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony residential entry and Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Donna J. Layton v. City of Lebanon (NFP)
06A04-1008-PL-597
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of motion to correct error after jury awarded Layton $133 in her lawsuit against the city after sewage invaded her residence and crawl-space.

Peter Frericks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
43A03-1008-CR-412
Criminal. Dismisses appeal of revocation of probation.

James L. Whitfield v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1008-CR-938
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

Byron G. Lewis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A03-1004-CR-200
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for three counts of Class A felony dealing in cocaine. Remands for correction to the abstract of judgment.

Hector R. Castillo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1009-CR-1020
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony dealing in methamphetamine.

Jarrod W. Fair v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1012-CR-685
Criminal. Vacates possession of cocaine and marijuana convictions and sentences and affirms convictions of and sentences for dealing in cocaine and dealing in marijuana.

Rodney L. Williams v. Sullivan County Sheriff's Department, et al. (NFP)
77A04-1006-MI-403
Miscellaneous. Dismisses challenge to the ruling on Williams' wife’s motion to intervene. Affirms the trial court was not required to order an appraisal of Williams’ property prior to forfeiture.

Gerry S. Hicks v. Rachel M. (Hicks) Villareal (NFP)
43A03-1102-DR-78
Domestic relation. Affirms order granting Villareal’s motion to modify child support.

Trisha Dawn Hudson v. Jeffrey Michael Hudson (NFP)
82A01-1009-DR-545
Domestic relation. Affirms modification of custody in favor of the father but reverses order directing mother’s parenting time with the children be supervised.

Indiana Tax Court had 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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT