ILNews

Opinions March 2, 2011

March 2, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
County Council of Porter County v. Northwest Indiana Regional Dev. Authority, et al.
37A04-1004-CT-291
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for the Northwest Indiana Regional Development Authority and the denial of the council’s motion for summary judgment on the council’s complaint seeking declaratory judgment it has the right to withdraw from the RDA. Porter County cannot withdraw from the RDA and the council waived its argument that the original legislation establishing the RDA Act is unconstitutional special legislation.

National Wine & Spirits v. Indiana Alcohol & Tobacco Commission, et al.
49A02-1006-PL-612
Civil plenary. Affirms order dismissing National Wine’s petition for judicial review of the issuance of a wine and liquor permit to competitor Southern Wine & Spirits of Indiana. National Wine didn’t meet the statutory standing requirement for judicial review and its due process argument that it is entitled to standing fails.

Loren C. Lewis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A04-1008-CR-539
Criminal. Affirms sentence following conviction of nonsupport of a dependent child as a Class D felony.

Tauheedah Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1007-CR-720
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Michael Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1008-CR-842
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation.

Brian Beaman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-CR-583
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Kenneth Carson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
67A04-1009-CR-585
Criminal. Remands for clarification of the number of days of credit time Carson should receive.

Steven Sanders v. State of Indiana (NFP)
58A01-1008-CR-388
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following revocation of probation.

Valdez Leshawn Reed v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1005-CR-624
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class B misdemeanors false informing and visiting a common nuisance.

Joni Shaw v. Covenant Care Waldron Home LLC (NFP)
73A04-1005-SC-317
Small claim. Affirms judgment in favor of Covenant Care in an action for the payment of fees incurred while Shaw’s mother was a resident at Waldron Health & Rehab Center.

Justin Floyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-CR-550
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Tommy A. Watson, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1006-CR-406
Criminal. Affirms termination of Watson’s participation in a drug court program and order that he serve a sentence that had been stayed pending his successful completion of that program.

Indiana Spine Group, P.C. v. Hardigg Industries (NFP)
93A02-1008-EX-933
Civil. Reverses denial of Indiana Spine Group’s application for adjustment of claim for provider fee to recover the unpaid balance for services it rendered to an employee of Hardigg. Remands for further proceedings.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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. 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!!!

  2. 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?

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT