Opinions March 14, 2011

March 14, 2011
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
In Re: Gerald W. Davis Jr.; Linda Reeves v. Gerald W. Davis Jr.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson.
Civil. Affirms District Court’s affirmation of the bankruptcy court ruling that Davis’ debt owed to Reeves was dischargeable. There was no finding of fraudulent intent on Davis’ part, as is required for the application of 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(2) to prevent Davis’ debt to Reeves from being dischargeable. The decision in United States v. Childs forecloses a challenge to the reasonableness of the traffic stop.

United States of America v. Willie McBride a/k/a William Reo Davis
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress following a traffic stop. The police officer did not violate McBride’s rights under the Fourth Amendment by detaining him beyond the time needed to complete the traffic stop.

Rex M. Joseph Jr., trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Timothy Wardrop v. Elan Motorsports Technologies Racing Corp.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Larry J. McKinney.
Civil. Reverses decision of District Court to not allow an amended complaint naming Elan Inc., not Elan Motorsports Technology Racing Corp., as the defendant with relation back to the date of the original complaint filed by Wardrop. On remand, the judge will have to decide whether the difference in the amended complaint as compared to the original warrants rejection of it.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Phillip Forman, et al. v. Western Reserve Mutual Casualty Company, et al.
Civil tort. Grants rehearing after trial court certified case for interlocutory appeal. Affirms summary judgment for Western Reserve Mutual Casualty Co. on the issue of whether it has a duty to defend Wayne Penn, Lisa Orr, and Bradley Orr in a suit filed by Forman after he was injured after taking some of Lisa’s prescribed methadone. The language of the policy is clear that Forman’s injury is excluded from liability coverage.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.D. and K.D.; R.D. v. IDCS (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

James Larkin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms aggregate sentence of 60 years, reverses the order that Larkin serve all 60 years as executed time in the Department of Correction and remands with instructions to issue an amended sentencing order and any other documents or chronological case summary entries necessary to impose a total sentence of 60 years with 50 years executed and 10 years suspended to probation. Judge Riley dissents.

City of Peru, et al. v. Matthew and Tracy Lewis (NFP)
Civil tort. Reverses denial of the City of Peru and other defendants’ motion for summary judgment regarding a negligence action brought by the Lewises. Remands with instructions to enter summary judgment in favor of the city defendants.

Teri and Robert Steinborn v. LaPorte County Board of Zoning Appeals, et al. (NFP)
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court ruling affirming the decision of the LaPorte County Board of Zoning Appeals that granted a special exception to Horvath Towers.

Donald King v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Terry Lee Krzeminski v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Sonya Barger v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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