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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT