ILNews

Opinions June 7, 2013

June 7, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Supervised Admin. of the Estate of Cora E. Young, deceased; Terry Douthitt, Kelly Douthitt, and Kevin Douthitt v. Theodore R. Young
53A04-1301-EU-36
Estate, unsupervised. Affirms trial court’s finding that the proceeds of a sale of Cora Young’s property should be distributed to her second husband at her death. Since the property was a specific bequest under Young’s will and was sold before her death, it was adeemed by extinction and therefore the proceeds pass to the residuary beneficiary under her will, which is her second husband.

Gayle Fischer v. Michael and Noel Heymann

49A02-1204-PL-340
Civil plenary. Reverses $93,972.18 in damages to Fischer on her breach of contract claim and orders the court to enter a damage award of $117. Holds that the Heymanns committed an anticipatory breach of the purchase agreement on Feb. 10, 2006; that, given the evidence and the trial court’s findings, Fischer’s duty to mitigate arose on Feb. 11, 2006, when she learned of the Heymanns’ breach; and that Fischer failed to act with reasonable diligence to mitigate her damages at her first opportunity, which was no later than Feb. 18, 2006. The trial court acted within its discretion when it limited Fischer’s award for attorney fees and costs, but orders the court to enter an award for those fees commensurate with Fischer’s recovery on the merits and court costs. Judge Bradford dissents.

Jerome K. Jackson, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A04-1210-PC-535
Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for post-conviction relief and remands for findings and conclusions on the failure to present an officer’s testimony regarding the validity of a license plate as a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Reverses on issue of attorney’s failure to present evidence on the issue of whether children were present at the school at the time of Jackson’s arrest. If court finds the failure to present the officer’s testimony wasn’t ineffective assistance of counsel, directs Jackson receive a new trial on the issue of a statutory defense if the state so chooses.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: M.R. and L.P. v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
38A04-1211-JT-573
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Cody Matthew Fritz v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1212-CR-539
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated with a prior conviction.

James D. Brooks v. State of Indiana (NFP)

02A03-1210-CR-454
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class D felony theft.

Larry C. Perry, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

02A03-1211-CR-456
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony invasion of privacy.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT