ILNews

Opinions March 14, 2011

March 14, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
In Re: Gerald W. Davis Jr.; Linda Reeves v. Gerald W. Davis Jr.
10-2757
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
10-2094
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.
10-1420
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.
33A01-1007-CT-343
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)
79A02-1008-JT-943
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

James Larkin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
89A01-1007-CR-367
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)
85A04-1010-CT-611
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)
46A04-1010-PL-657
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)
58A01-1007-CR-363
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Terry Lee Krzeminski v. State of Indiana (NFP)
76A03-1007-CR-390
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Sonya Barger v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1007-CR-435
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

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. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT