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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT