ILNews

Opinions March 15, 2011

March 15, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Debra L. Walker v. David M. Pullen
64S05-1101-CT-6
Civil tort. Reverses grant of Pullen’s motion to have a new trial and remands for the trial court to reinstate the original jury verdict of $10,070. The trial court judge only made general findings and not special findings as required by Indiana Trial Rule 59(J). Justice Dickson concurs in result.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Grange Mutual Casualty, et al. v. West Bend Mutual Ins., et al.
29A02-1008-PL-965
Civil plenary. Affirms in part and reverses in part summary judgment granted to West Bend Mutual. Finds that both policies were triggered – West Bend’s was triggered by the original fracturing of the storm drain pipe which resulted in immediate damage to the pipe and the subsequent flooding. Grange’s was triggered by the flood damage that occurred during its policy period. Remands for the trial court to apportion damages accordingly. Judge May dissents.

Jason W. Hall v. State of Indiana
25A05-1008-CR-534
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class B felony burglary. Hall didn’t establish an abuse of the trial court’s sentencing discretion or that his sentence is inappropriate. He also wasn’t denied credit time to which he was entitled.

Lovetha Smitherman v. Kroger Limited Partnership I, et al. (NFP)
49A02-1008-PL-880
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of partial summary judgment to Kroger upon Smitherman’s claim for negligent hiring and retention.

Susan Ricketts v. Subaru of Indiana Automotive (NFP)
93A02-1008-EX-1030
Civil. Affirms order of the Worker’s Compensation Board on Ricketts’ claim for disability and medical benefits arising from a work related accident.

L.M. v. B.S., et al. (NFP)
71A03-1010-MI-514
Miscellaneous. Affirms order denying grandmother L.M.’s verified petition for grandparent visitation.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of S.H.; R.H. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
36A01-1008-JT-418
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "associates are becoming more mercenary. The path to partnership has become longer and more difficult so they are chasing short-term gains like high compensation." GOOD FOR THEM! HELL THERE OUGHT TO BE A UNION!

  2. Let's be honest. A glut of lawyers out there, because law schools have overproduced them. Law schools dont care, and big law loves it. So the firms can afford to underpay them. Typical capitalist situation. Wages have grown slowly for entry level lawyers the past 25 years it seems. Just like the rest of our economy. Might as well become a welder. Oh and the big money is mostly reserved for those who can log huge hours and will cut corners to get things handled. More capitalist joy. So the answer coming from the experts is to "capitalize" more competition from nonlawyers, and robots. ie "expert systems." One even hears talk of "offshoring" some legal work. thus undercutting the workers even more. And they wonder why people have been pulling for Bernie and Trump. Hello fools, it's not just the "working class" it's the overly educated suffering too.

  3. And with a whimpering hissy fit the charade came to an end ... http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2016/07/27/all-charges-dropped-against-all-remaining-officers-in-freddie-gray-case/ WHISTLEBLOWERS are needed more than ever in a time such as this ... when politics trump justice and emotions trump reason. Blue Lives Matter.

  4. "pedigree"? I never knew that in order to become a successful or, for that matter, a talented attorney, one needs to have come from good stock. What should raise eyebrows even more than the starting associates' pay at this firm (and ones like it) is the belief systems they subscribe to re who is and isn't "fit" to practice law with them. Incredible the arrogance that exists throughout the practice of law in this country, especially at firms like this one.

  5. Finally, an official that realizes that reducing the risks involved in the indulgence in illicit drug use is a great way to INCREASE the problem. What's next for these idiot 'proponents' of needle exchange programs? Give drunk drivers booze? Give grossly obese people coupons for free junk food?

ADVERTISEMENT