ILNews

Opinions March 15, 2013

March 15, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Charles Meriwether v. State of Indiana
49A02-1208-CR-676
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana and Class D felony possession of paraphernalia. The trial court did not commit fundamental error when it admitted Meriwether’s statement into evidence because he was not in custody when he made it.
 
State Farm Insurance Company v. Thomas A. Young and Mary E. Young, Joel P. Genth and Philip K. Genth, INGENIX
92A05-1205-CT-258
Civil tort. Affirms order reducing the subrogation lien that State Farm Insurance Co. held against Thomas and Mary Young. To allow State Farm to recover the full value of its subrogation lien under a policy taken out by the Youngs, when State Farm did not pay the full value of the Youngs’ claim under a policy taken out by the Genths, would unjustly enrich State Farm.

Matthew Bryant v. State of Indiana

03A04-1205-CR-283
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class B felony aggravated battery and finding Bryant is a habitual offender. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain evidence, the evidence supports his conviction and his sentence is appropriate.

NIPSCO Industrial Group v. Northern Indiana Public Service Company, Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (NFP)
93A02-1205-EX-436
Agency action. Affirms denial of NIPSCO Industrial Group's petition for reconsideration regarding the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission’s final order that set the allocation method for NIPSCO’s Environmental Cost Recovery Mechanism and Environmental Expense Recovery Mechanism factors for a Qualified Pollution Control Property under construction.

Joshua Gaunt v. State of Indiana (NFP)

02A03-1204-CR-195
Criminal. Affirms four-year sentence for Class C felony corrupt business influence.

D.P. v. M.Y. (NFP)
71A03-1209-JP-384
Juvenile. Affirms order denying father’s petition to modify custody.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: D.C., M.H., A.J., D.J., & J.J. (Minor Children), and M.H. (Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A05-1207-JT-342
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

MJB Lawn Care v. Tower Cleaning Systems, Inc. (NFP)
64A04-1207-CT-341
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Tower Cleaning Systems on its request for indemnification pursuant to its contract with MJB Lawn Care.

Mahoganee K. Edmond v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1206-CR-281
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony aggravated battery, Class C felony battery with a deadly weapon and Class A misdemeanor criminal recklessness.

Kentuckiana Trench Shoring, LLC v. National Water Service, LLC (NFP)
59A05-1206-PL-315
Civil plenary. Reverses judgment in favor of National Water Service for breach of contract.

Kimberly R. Goff (Miller) v. Larry Goff (NFP)
49A04-1205-DR-277
Domestic relation. Affirms order regarding the amount Kimberly Goff Miller was due from her ex-husband as part of their 1997 divorce order.

Samuel G. Dykstra and Michelle L. Bahus v. The City of Hammond (NFP)
45A03-1206-PL-287
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the city of Hammond regarding ordinances regulating firearms.

Tyrone Frazier v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1201-PC-11
Post conviction. Affirms denial of successive petition for post-conviction relief.

Christopher Whirl v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1206-CR-516
Criminal. Affirms in part and reverses in part the three robbery convictions and remands with instructions to vacate two of them and resentence Whirl on one count of robbery. Also orders the trial court to enter judgments of conviction and sentences on Class B criminal confinement felonies.

State of Indiana v. Mark M. Hairston (NFP)

02A04-1209-PC-476
Post conviction. Reverses vacation of habitual offender finding.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of J.B., Minor Child, and Her Mother, A.B.: A.B. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)

79A02-1209-JT-764
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court issued no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT