ILNews

Opinions March 1, 2011

March 1, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Gary Hughes
18A02-1006-PL-659
Civil. Reverses and remands entry of judgment in favor of appellee-plaintiff Gary Hughes on his contract claim in the amount of $166,792.83. Auto-Owners contends, inter alia, that the trial court erred in denying its summary judgment motion on the basis that Hughes’ suit was barred by a one-year limitation in the relevant insurance policy.
 
James Taylor and Nancy Taylor v. Ford Motor Co., et al.
49A02-1007-CT-823
Civil. Affirms trial court’s grant of defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In their appeal, the Taylors argued the trial court did have subject matter jurisdiction. The Taylors filed a claim Feb. 12, 2009, that the defendants’ negligence caused James Taylor’s injuries which in turn caused his wife to lose the services of her husband. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on March 26, 2010, claiming that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction of the Taylors’ claims because Indiana’s worker’s compensation laws provided the exclusive remedy.

Tyson G. Keplinger v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1006-CR-610
Criminal. Affirms conviction of conspiracy to commit murder, a Class A felony, and attempted murder, a Class A felony.
 
A.K. and Jeffry G. Price v. K.M.K. (NFP)
34A05-1008-CT-522
Civil. Affirms trial court’s denial of Price’s request for attorney’s fees from appellee-respondent K.M.K., following K.M.K.’s action against A.K., which the trial court dismissed.
 
Denise Tinsley v. Marion T., LLC, et al. (NFP)
27A05-1008-CT-503
Civil. Affirms trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of appellees-defendants with respect to the estate’s claim for negligence resulting in Marvin Tinsley’s death.
 
Barry L. Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A04-1006-CR-375
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s revocation of probation.
 
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT