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. 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?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT