ILNews

Opinions March 5, 2012

March 5, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Brandy L. Walczak v. Labor Works-Fort Wayne, LLC, d/b/a Labor Works
02A04-1109-PL-509
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment for Labor Works-Fort Wayne in Walczak’s suit for unpaid wages. Concludes that the matter must be first submitted to the Department of Labor for resolution, so the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims until the DOL had made a determination. Remands with instructions to dismiss the complaint.

Christopher Starkey v. Janet Panoch (NFP)
49A05-1104-DR-194
Domestic relation. Remands with instructions that husband still make the required house and utility payments but that he be reimbursed from house proceeds for these amounts; for further consideration and findings as to whether husband is entitled to a credit for his overpayment of temporary maintenance and support; and to clarify the parties’ date of separation and to make any necessary corrections to medical expense calculations based upon the wrong date. Affirms dissolution judgment in all other respects.

Brenda S. Hanna v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A01-1105-CR-277
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of a narcotic drug.

Jeremy Whetstone v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1108-CR-390
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony stalking and Class A misdemeanor criminal conversion.

Gregory Young v. Nicole Young (NFP)
20A05-1107-DR-383
Domestic relation. Affirms award of maintenance and attorney fees to wife.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT