ILNews

Opinions March 19, 2012

March 19, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court
Jimmie E. Jones, Jr. v. State of Indiana
29S02-1108-CR-511
Criminal. Adopts Court of Appeals opinion in full, which affirmed the refusal by the trial court to give Jones’ tendered instructions on reckless homicide and involuntary manslaughter as lesser-included offenses to the murder charge. The evidence didn’t support a reckless homicide instruction and the charging information for the murder count foreclosed an involuntary manslaughter instruction.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re the Paternity of C.S.: M.R. (Mother) v. R.S. (Father)
53A01-1108-JP-381
Juvenile. Affirms order granting a petition for modification of custody filed by father. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that C.S.’s physical and mental/academic maturation constituted a substantial change warranting modification of custody. The trial court did not misinterpret Indiana Code 31-17-2-8 in the process of drawing conclusions from its findings, nor did it err in relying on the updated custody evaluation.

Robert Hardin v. Carlotta Hardin
18A05-1105-DR-301
Domestic relation. Reverses and remands as to the trial court’s division of Robert Hardin’s pension, including the cost to Carlotta Hardin of the survivor’s benefit. Affirms as to all other issues. The trial court used an incorrect coverture fraction and erred in dividing the pension.

Charles L. Eckard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1108-CR-382
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery.

Juan Emerson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1102-PC-95
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Kelly Scott Thomas v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1111-PC-651
Post conviction. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw petition for post-conviction relief and denial of that petition.

T.N.S. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A03-1105-JV-263
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent for committing what would be sexual battery if committed by an adult.

Mark Wiley v. Midwest Poultry Services, LP (NFP)
93A02-1107-EX-593
Agency appeal. The full board of the Worker’s Compensation Board of Indiana erred in denying Wiley’s claim for the reimbursement of costs associated with his wheelchair because the undisputed evidence reveals his impairment is reduced by having a working motorized wheelchair and the parties’ agreement did not waive this claim. Further, based on a plain reading of the agreement, the board did not err in awarding Wiley reimbursement for the cost of repairing the chair lift added to his pick-up truck. Remands to the full board to enter an amended order consistent with this opinion.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. IF the Right to Vote is indeed a Right, then it is a RIGHT. That is the same for ALL eligible and properly registered voters. And this is, being able to cast one's vote - until the minute before the polls close in one's assigned precinct. NOT days before by absentee ballot, and NOT 9 miles from one's house (where it might be a burden to get to in time). I personally wait until the last minute to get in line. Because you never know what happens. THAT is my right, and that is Mr. Valenti's. If it is truly so horrible to let him on school grounds (exactly how many children are harmed by those required to register, on school grounds, on election day - seriously!), then move the polling place to a different location. For ALL voters in that precinct. Problem solved.

  2. "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!

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. "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.

ADVERTISEMENT