Opinions March 13, 2013

March 13, 2013
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Kelly S. Thomas v. Dushan Zatecky, superintendent, Pendleton Correctional Facility
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Denies Thomas’ request that he be allowed collateral relief to file appeals without regard to the fees required by Section 1913 and the resolutions of the Judicial Conference. Gives Thomas 21 days to file in the 7th Circuit a motion for permission to proceed in forma pauperis and a certificate of appealability. Failure to meet this schedule will result in dismissal for failure to prosecute.

Indiana Supreme Court
Brandy L. Walczak, Individually and on Behalf of Those Similarly Situated v. Labor Works - Fort Wayne LLC, d/b/a Labor Works
Civil plenary. Concludes that Walczak had a reasonable expectation of continuing to receive job assignments from Labor Works on the day she filed her claim, and holds that she was not separated from the payroll for the purpose of the Wage Claims Act and may proceed with her claims as she filed it under the Wage Payment Act.

Indiana Court of Appeals
N.O. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent child for committing what would be Class B misdemeanor battery if committed by an adult.

Michael A. Combs v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for three counts of Class B felony neglect of a dependent, Class A felony child molesting and Class D felony battery.

Troy Farris v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms 180-day sentence imposed following probation violation.

Sedrick J. Grandberry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony criminal trespass.

Tyler Becker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class A misdemeanor operating while intoxicated.

Joshua D. Huff v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.

Benjamin Mentink v. Karen Downing (NFP)

Protective order. Affirms issuance of protective order against Mentink.

Victoria Anderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief.

J.A.H. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms order committing J.A.H. to the Indiana Department of Correction.

Lavern Baltimore v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for post-conviction relief and remands for further proceedings.

Bruce Anderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery resulting in bodily injury.

Pat Fleming and Bob Steffan d/b/a Dr. Bob's RV Service v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc. and Gemb Lending, Inc. (NFP)
Civil plenary. Reverses dismissal of complaint to foreclose upon mechanic’s liens and remands for additional proceedings.

The Indiana Tax Court issued no opinions prior to IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues