ILNews

Opinions March 14, 2013

March 14, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael Bowser v. State of Indiana

71A03-1208-CR-361
Criminal. Affirms two convictions of Class C felony battery by means of a deadly weapon. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying Bowser’s motion for severance and there is sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions.

Gersh Zavodnik v. Brian Richards and Njgolfman.com a/k/a Savva's Golf Enterprises a/k/a ProGolfJerseyCity@yahoo.com and, Steve Panayiotov a/k/a Steve Panayiotou a/k/a Savva Panayiotou
49A02-1209-CC-750
Civil collection. Affirms dismissal of lawsuits against Giselle Guzman, Brian Richards and Steve Panayiotou. The lawsuits were similar to previous lawsuits that had been dismissed without prejudice under Indiana Trial Rule 41(E).

Sherri A. Cornejo v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Houchens Food Group, Inc. (NFP)
93A02-1210-EX-786
Agency action. Affirms determination Cornejo is ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits.

Citizens Financial Bank v. Richard Cooper and Peggy Cooper (NFP)

45A04-1208-PL-411
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of motion for garnishment order filed by Richard and Peggy Cooper.

Richard Lindsey v. City of Clinton, Indiana (NFP)
83A05-1206-MI-317
Miscellaneous. Affirms decision of the Police Department Merit Board for the city of Clinton to terminate Lindsey’s employment as a police officer.

John F. Minter-Bey III v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A05-1205-PC-269
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Heath Lord v. Ashley Lord (NFP)
32A04-1208-PO-422
Protective order. Reverses denial of Heath Lord’s motion to correct error, which challenged the issuance of a protective order against him.

Bennie Chamberlain v. State of Indiana (NFP)

79A02-1208-CR-670
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felonies stalking and criminal confinement, two counts of Class D felony residential entry, Class A misdemeanors battery and invasion of privacy and Chamberlain’s status as a habitual offender.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by 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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. 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!!!

  3. 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?

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT