7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Kristine
A. and Larry G. Dawson v. Fifth Third Bank
49A02-1107-PL-704
Civil plenary. Affirms order denying the Dawsons’ motion for summary judgment and granting Fifth Third Bank’s
cross-motion for summary judgment on its claim for replevin. When Magish, who sold a motorcycle to the Dawsons, defaulted
on his loan from Fifth Third, the bank as the secured party had the right to take possession of the motorcycle. The Dawsons’
interest in the motorcycle as its purchasers is not superior to the bank’s perfected security interest.
D.C. v. J.A.C.
32A04-1106-DR-296
Domestic relation. Reverses order modifying custody in favor of the ex-husband and preventing mother from relocating with
their minor child. Father is not entitled to appellate attorney fees, and relocation alone cannot be used as a reason to support
custody modification.
Clark County Drainage Board and Clark County Board of Commissioners v. Robert Isgrigg
10A05-1102-PL-68
Civil plenary. Grants rehearing and affirms original opinion in all respects. Finds neither of Isgrigg’s assertions
on rehearing are meritorious.
Carolyn Boss v. State of Indiana
49A05-1106-CR-320
Criminal. Remands with instructions to vacate Boss’ convictions and sentences for harboring a non-immunized dog as
Class B misdemeanors and enter a determination that she committed harboring a non-immunized dog as Class C infractions. Affirms
convictions of six counts of Class A misdemeanor failure to restrain a dog and sentence.
Steinrock Roofing & Sheet Metal Inc. v. James S. McCulloch, PNC Bank, N.A.
22A05-1108-CC-457
Civil collection. Affirms the trial court’s determination that Steinrock Roofing breached the contract and affirms
award of damages to McCulloch in a dispute over payment for work completed. Substantial evidence was presented establishing
the contractor’s work was deficient. The trial court properly concluded that the contractor had waived any claim to
reduce the damage under the Home Improvement Warranties statute.
Lewis J. Richardson and Laurel Richardson v. Board of Commissioners of Owen County
60A01-1106-PL-228
Civil plenary. Affirms finding that the Richardsons lacked standing as an aggrieved party to remonstrate against the vacation
of a roadway leading to a cemetery. The Richardsons are not abutting landowners to the vacated roadway and have failed to
demonstrate that they have sustained an injury that is unique or special to them.
Imperial Insurance Restoration & Remodeling, Inc. v. James Costello
10A05-1109-SC-478
Small claim. Reverses order granting judgment in favor of Costello on Imperial Insurance’s claims for breach of contract.
Although Imperial provided a contract to Costello that it concedes did not satisfy requirements of the Indiana Home Improvement
Contracts Act, that non-compliance did not automatically render the contract void. Concludes that the contract is enforceable
and should not be voided. Remands with instructions to enter judgment in favor of Imperial for $669.86 and to hold a hearing
to determine contractual interest due and if attorney fees or other costs are warranted.
Bilsland, LLC, LPM Investments, LLC, Phillip D. Mervis, Louis Mervis, Henry Bilsland, Justin Bilsland, and Biosafe Engineering,
LLC v. Bradley D. Crain and Richard J. Redpath (NFP)
32A01-1106-PL-266
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of an Indiana Trial Rule 12(B)(8) motion by Crain and Redpath to dismiss the appellants’
claim.
Delmar J. Kent v. State of Indiana (NFP)
39A01-1105-CR-234
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for two counts of Class A felony child molesting and one count of Class C felony
child molesting.
In Re the Paternity of: B.H. by next friend: B.C. (Father) v. D.H. (Mother) (NFP)
49A04-1106-JP-311
Juvenile. Affirms denial of father’s requests to place B.H. in a different school district and to grant him joint physical
and/or legal custody.
Andrew Abbott v. State of Indiana (NFP)
33A04-1109-CR-545
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A misdemeanor trespass.
State of Indiana, Little Calumet River Basin Development Commission v. Gary Murphy and Lake County Treasurer (NFP)
45A03-1106-PL-261
Civil plenary. Affirms jury verdict of $332,172 in damages to Murphy and the Lake County Treasurer for multiple easements
placed on Murphy’s property by the development commission.
J.R.T. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1110-JV-477
Juvenile. Affirms commitment to the Department of Correction.
Vicky L. Tisdial v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A05-1011-CR-728
Criminal. Reverses denial of petition requesting expungement of arrest record.
Derrick L. Myers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1106-CR-508
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.
Aaron Isby v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1107-CR-774
Criminal. Affirms denial of Isby’s motions to compel his original trial counsel to produce all documents relating to
his 1992 trial and for copies of his preliminary hearing transcript and the transcripts of three depositions taken leading
up to his 1992 trial.
Gerald McKinney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1108-CR-450
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor animal cruelty.
Rondell Boyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1108-CR-725
Criminal. Affirms three convictions of Class C felony child molesting.
K.J. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and T.N.V.A.H. (NFP)
93A02-1106-EX-634
Agency appeal. Affirms denial of unemployment benefits.
DeCarlos J. Freeman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-1111-CR-619
Criminal. Affirms convictions of resisting law enforcement – one as a Class D felony and one as a Class A misdemeanor
– following a guilty plea.














Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.