ILNews

Opinions June 4, 2012

June 4, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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.

 

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