ILNews

Opinions - June 9, 2010

June 9, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinions were posted after IL deadline Tuesday.
Indiana Supreme Court

Walker Whatley v. State of Indiana
49S02-0908-CR-379
Criminal. Affirms Whatley’s conviction of and sentence for Class A felony dealing in cocaine because he was arrested within 1,000 feet of a church that provided services to youth on a regular basis. A jury could properly find that the nearby church was a “youth program center” because it provided a building or structure that on a regular basis offered recreational, social, or other programs or services for persons less than 18 years of age. Justices Boehm and Rucker dissent.

Indiana Tax Court
Lawrence and Glenda Pachniak v. Marshall County Assessor (NFP)
49T10-0904-TA-18
Tax. Affirms the Indiana Board of Tax Review’s final determination regarding the Pachniak’s 2006 real property assessment.

Today’s opinions:
Indiana Supreme Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Indiana Court of Appeals

J.M. v. M.A., et al.
20A04-0911-CV-640
Civil. Reverses and remands decision of trial court with instructions trial court vacate its order adjudicating J.M. as the legal father of W.H. and ordering him to pay child support. Additionally, because the state has conceded that J.M. is not W.H.‘s biological father, the trial court must set aside the paternity affidavit.
 
Fifth Third Bank v. Peoples National Bank

49A02-0908-CV-753
Civil. Reverses and remands with instructions to determine the appropriate amount of sanctions to be assessed against Fifth Third Bank. The issue raised was whether Fifth Third waived its right to enforce its security interest with respect to its indebted depositor’s checking account and proceeds held therein.
 
American Heritage Banco Inc. v. Arthur W. Cranston and Joanne E. Cranston, et al.
76A04-0907-CV-384
Civil. Reverses and remands trial court’s judgment in favor of Arthur W. and Joanne E. Cranston on American Heritage Banco Inc.’s mortgage foreclosure claim and claim for damages on a promissory note against the Cranstons. The trial court had denied the bank’s claims for relief and instead entered judgment in favor of the Cranstons on the Cranstons’ affirmative defense and counterclaim for constructive fraud against AHB. The trial court also awarded treble damages and attorney fees to the Cranstons pursuant to the Indiana Crime Victim’s Relief Act.

Ben Erwin and Shona Erwin as parents, natural guardians, and next-of-friend of their minor child, D.E. v. Brenda Roe
16A01-0906-CV-312
Civil. Affirms in part, reverses in part, and remands. Concludes (1) trial court was within its discretion to deny the Erwins’ extension of time; (2) Roe is not liable for treble damages with respect to the federal statute; however, knowledge is not a requirement for violation of Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act; (3) Roe was negligent per se with respect to state tort law; and (4) there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Roe was provided with a reasonable amount of time after she received notice lead paint would need to be removed from the house she rented to the Erwins before they broke their lease.

Adoption of D.C.; J.C. v. J.C. and A.C.

49A02-0909-CV-862
Civil. Affirms order of trial court that grants the petition of D.C.’s stepfather J.C. and his wife A.C. to adopt D.C. D.C., born May 5, 1998, has lived with stepfather since his birth. D.C.’s mother died in 2005 and stepfather has since remarried. Among the issues raised by D.C.’s biological father, appellant J.C., was whether his parental rights may not be terminated absent the procedural protections of the Indian Child Welfare Act. The Sitka Tribe of Alaska was permitted to intervene regarding the potential application of the ICWA.
 
Value World Inc. of Indiana v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and C.C.

93A02-1001-EX-61
Civil. Affirms determination of the Unemployment Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development that concludes Value World did not have good cause for failing to attend an administrative appeal hearing.

Ebrahima Diallo v. State of Indiana
49A05-0910-CR-614
Criminal. Affirms convictions of three counts of Class C felony forgery.
 
Indiana Department of Correction v. Douglas Haley
56A03-0911-CR-553
Criminal. Reverses denial of DOC’s motion to correct error, which challenged the trial court’s order granting Haley’s petition for educational credit time.
 
Aaron Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

71A03-1001-CR-11
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea.
 
Vicki Sue Maze v. Robert L. Davenport, et al. (NFP)
50A03-0911-CV-531
Civil. Affirms trial court’s grant of summary judgment with respect to Maze’s claim for damages for breach of contract. Remands as to Maze’s unjust enrichment claim.
 
Joseph B. Williams AKA Lonnie Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A05-0906-CV-334
Civil. Affirms trial court’s denial of petition for writ of habeas corpus, after revocation of parole.

Bruce W. Guess v. State of Indiana (NFP)

64A03-0910-CR-497
Criminal. Affirms sentence following a guilty plea to murder and robbery as a Class B felony.
 
Jerome Ford v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0911-CR-1067
Criminal. Affirms conviction of battery, a Class A misdemeanor.
 
Terry Ray Isaacs v. State of Indiana (NFP)
21A01-0907-PC-328
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
 
Andrew Tesch v. State of Indiana (NFP)  
22A01-1001-CR-26
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following guilty plea to Class C felony robbery.
 
Anthony L. Beery v. State of Indiana (NFP)
01A02-1002-CR-108
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s finding of violation of probation and probation revocation.
 
Leeland Runkel v. State of Indiana (NFP)
38A04-0909-PC-546
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
 
James Watkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0911-CR-1058
Criminal. Affirms conviction of resisting law enforcement, a Class D felony.
 
Wolf Lake Pub Inc. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, et al. (NFP)
93A02-0910-EX-957
Civil. Affirms decision of the Indiana Unemployment Insurance Review Board dismissing Wolf Lake Pub’s appeal for failure to appear at a hearing.
 
Copenhaver Construction Consultants LLC, et al. v. Lincoln Bank (NFP)
32A01-0909-CV-476
Civil. Affirms trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Lincoln Bank and denial of appellants’ counter-motion for partial summary judgment.

Gary Parsley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A05-0911-CR-650
Criminal. Reverses and remands sentence following a guilty plea to attempted aggravated battery, a Class B felony.

Mark Vickery v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1001-CR-38
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to remove sexually violent predator status.
 
Rickey D. Miller and Jennifer Miller v. Art Duncan, M.D. (NFP)
22A01-0907-CV-316
Civil. Affirms judgment entered on medical malpractice action after jury returned a verdict in favor of Dr. Duncan.
 
Steven T. Hutson Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
61A05-1002-CR-56
Criminal. Affirms probation revocation.
 
Tara L. Huffman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1002-CR-89
Criminal. Affirms convictions of possession of cocaine, fraud, and theft as Class D felonies.
 
J.D. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0911-JV-1112
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication of J.D. as a juvenile delinquent after the juvenile court found he committed acts that would be Class B felony burglary and Class D felony theft if committed by an adult.

Matthew Ferry v. State of Indiana (NFP)  
79A04-0910-CR-606
Criminal. Affirms convictions of possession of marijuana, a Class A misdemeanor; maintaining a common nuisance, a Class D felony; possession of marijuana while having a prior conviction, a Class D felony, and with being a habitual substance offender.

Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  2. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  3. We are a Finance Industry Company professionals with over 15 Years Experience and a focus on providing Bank Guarantee and Standby Letter of Credit from some of the World Top 25 Prime Banks primarily from Barclays, Deutsche Bank, HSBC,Credit Suisse e.t.c. FEATURES: Amounts from $1 million to 5 Billion+ Euro’s or US Dollars Great Attorney Trust Account Protection Delivered via MT760, MT799 and MT103 Swift with Full Bank Responsibility Brokers Always Protected Purchase Instrument of BG/SBLC : 32%+2% Min Face Value cut = EUR/USD 1M-5B Lease Instrument of BG/SBLC : 4%+2% Min Face Value cut = EUR/USD 1M-5B Interested Agents/Brokers, Investors and Individual proposing international project funding should contact us for directives.We will be glad to share our working procedures with you upon request. We Facilitate Bank instruments SBLC for Lease and Purchase. Whether you are a new startup, medium or large establishment that needs a financial solution to fund/get your project off the ground or business looking for extra capital to expand your operation,our company renders credible and trusted bank guarantee provider who are willing to fund and give financing solutions that suits your specific business needs. We help you secure and issue sblc and bank guarantee for your trade, projects and investment from top AA rated world Banks like HSBC, Barclays, Dutch Ing Bank, Llyods e.t.c because that’s the best and safest strategy for our clients.e.t.c DESCRIPTION OF INSTRUMENTS 1. Instrument: Funds backed Bank Guarantee(BG) ICC-600 2. Currency : USD/EURO 3. Age of Issue: Fresh Cut 4. Term: One year and One day 5. Contract Amount: United State Dollars/Euros (Buyers Face Value) 6. Price : Buy:32%+1, Lease: 4%+2 7. Subsequent tranches: To be mutually agreed between both parties 8. Issuing Bank: Top RATED world banks like HSBC, Barclays, ING Dutch Bank, Llyods e.t.c 9. Delivery Term: Pre advise MT199 or MT799 first. Followed By SWIFT MT760 10. Payment Term: MT799 & Settlement via MT103 11. Hard Copy: By Bank Bonded Courier Interested Agents,Brokers, Investors and Individual proposing international project funding should contact us for directives.We will be glad to share our working procedures with you upon request. Name:Richardson McAnthony Contact Mail : intertekfinance@gmail.com

  4. Affordable Loan Offer (ericloanfinance@hotmail.com) NEED A LOAN?Sometime i really wanna help those in a financial problems.i was wondering why some people talks about inability to get a loan from a bank/company. have you guys ever try Eric Benson lending service.it cost dollars to loan from their company. my aunty from USA,just got a home loan from Eric Benson Lending banking card service.and they gave her a loan of 8,000,000 USD. they give out loan from 100,000 USD - 100,000,000 USD. try it yourself and testimony. have a great day as you try.Kiss & Hug. Contact E-mail: ericloanfinance@hotmail.com

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT