ILNews

Opinions March 12, 2012

March 12, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinions were posted after IL deadline Friday:

R.L. Turner Corporation v. Town of Brownsburg
32S01-1109-PL-573
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s grant of a petition for attorney fees to the Town of Brownsburg, rejecting Turner’s argument that the court erred in not entering special findings before awarding fees. Justices Rucker affirmed in part, but dissented in part, writing that he would remand for further proceedings, as the trial record shows no indication of whether Turner’s claims or defenses were frivolous, unreasonable, groundless or otherwise litigated in bad faith. Justice Dickson joined the dissent.

Indiana Department of State Revenue v. Rent-A-Center East, Inc.
49S10-1112-TA-683
Tax appeal. Reverses Indiana Tax Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Rent-A-Center East, holding that the taxpayer has the burden of showing a genuine issue of material fact exists with respect to unpaid tax, and that upon presenting that evidence the Indiana Department of State Revenue could reply before the Tax Court rules on a motion for summary judgment. Remands to the Tax Court for consideration of motions for summary judgment on their merits, in light of all the designated evidence the parties may tender.

Monday’s opinions:

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had issued no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor in interest to The Money Store Investment Corp., f/d/b/a First Union Small Business Capital v. Neal A. Summers, et al. (NFP)
02A04-1103-CP-112
Civil plenary. Dismisses appeal, holding that Wells Fargo failed to timely file its notice of appeal.

 

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. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

  2. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  3. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  4. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  5. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

ADVERTISEMENT