ILNews

Opinions March 3, 2014

March 3, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Joseph and M. Carmen Wysocki v. Barbara A. and William T. Johnson, both individually and as Trustees of the Barbara A. Johnson Living Trust
45A03-1309-CT-385
Civil tort. Affirms denial of the Wysockis’ request for attorney fees and additional damages under the Indiana Crime Victims Relief Act. The Wysockis were not victims of the criminal offense of fraud because the Johnsons were not charged with that crime in relation to the sale of the house, much less convicted of it in a court of law. In the absence of such a conviction, the CVRA does not apply.

CBR Event Decorators, Inc., Gregory Rankin, Robert Cochrane and John Bales v. Todd M. Gates
49A02-1302-CT-159
Civil tort. Affirms in part and reverses in part. Concludes shareholders Rankin, Cochrane and Bales are not personally liable for the attorney fees on the wrongful stop payment claim as this claim was only pled against CBR. The ex parte order requiring deposit of $1 million with the trial court clerk was not reversible error.

Shearece M. Love v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1308-CR-400
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony robbery.

In Re the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of D.D. and J.D.: D.H. (Mother) and J.P.D. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)

18A02-1307-JT-657
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Suzanne Throgmartin v. Wilson S. Stober and Christopher E. Clark (NFP)
49A02-1307-CT-656
Civil tort. Reverses order granting Stober’s and Clark’s motion for summary judgment and denial of Throgmartin’s motion to correct error pertaining to the summary judgment entered on her legal malpractice claim.

Cornell Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1308-CR-321
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance and Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.C., Minor Child, and his Father, M.C., M.C. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)

49A02-1308-JT-671
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Timothy J. Tkachik v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1308-CR-417
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class A felony neglect of a dependent.

Dawn Jackson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1308-CR-711
Criminal. Affirms convictions of 11 counts of Class D felony counterfeiting.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT