The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Friday:
Fresenius
USA Marketing, Inc. v. Ind. Dept. of State Revenue
49T10-1008-TA-45
Tax. Denies the Department of State Revenue’s motion to dismiss Fresenius USA Marketing’s appeal of the determination
denying the company’s claim for a refund of gross retail (sales) and use tax collected on its sales of dialysis equipment
and paid to the department between Jan. 1, 2004, and Oct. 31, 2007. The department’s claim that the court lacks subject
matter jurisdiction over the appeal is without merit.
Monday’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
R.
Bruce Wallace v. Alliance Environmental, Inc. and Ruth Brown (NFP)
49A04-1111-CC-665
Civil collection. Affirms trial court’s recalculation of damages to Brown for Wallace’s breach of fiduciary duty.
KMC
Real Estate Investors, LLC, George L. Alcorn, David Berry, David Britt, Abdul G. Buridi, Jeffrey Campbell, Keith Carter, et
al. v. RL BB Financial, LLC (NFP)
10A05-1109-MF-501
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms summary judgment in favor of RL BB Financial in its suit seeking to enforce each doctor’s
individual guarantees.
Alfonso
Menchaca v. Elias Terrazas (NFP)
45A03-1109-PL-415
Civil plenary. Affirms partial summary judgment for Terrazas in an action to seek repayment of amount Menchaca owes Terrazas
pursuant to a promissory note and remands for further proceedings.














the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!