ILNews

Opinions March 8, 2013

March 8, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Supervised Estate of Evelyn Garrard; Ronald Garrard v. Debra L. Teibel and Douglas Grimmer and Debra Lindsay
45A03-1111-PL-547
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgments in favor of Teibel, Grimmer and Lindsay, holding that Garrard had waived all issues on appeal and failed to show an issue of material fact existed. The court also warned Garrard about language in pleadings that disparaged other parties to the litigation and the bench.

KOA Properties, LLC v. Laura Matheison

48A04-1207-SC-365
Small claim. Affirms the small claims court did not abuse its discretion by appointing appellate counsel for Matheison and did not err in denying KOA’s motion to set aside the default judgment. The Court of Appeals ruled the notice of the claim clearly included KOA as a party defendant and found that although KOA was not served a separate notice of the initial claim, it was provided with service reasonably calculated to inform the business that a small claims action had been filed against it.

Cheryl L. Schlimpert v. Timothy M. Schlimpert (NFP)

71A03-1206-DR-297
Domestic relations. Dismisses, concluding wife did not file a timely appeal.

Clark Sales & Service, Inc. v. John D. Smith and Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. (NFP)

49A04-1208-PL-387
Civil plenary. Reverses and remands on interlocutory appeal a preliminary injunction granted to Clark’s based on terms of a non-disclosure agreement.

In the Matter of the Supervised Estate of George Lee Coon, Mark A. Coon v. Allen W. Coon, Donald L. Moster, Jr., and Beverly S. Moster (NFP)
70A01-1208-ES-384
Estate. Affirms summary judgment and concludes that evidence of a postnuptial agreement was properly admitted.

Davion Peterson v. Sandra Owen (NFP)
49A02-1207-PO-596
Protection order. Affirms Owen’s protection order.

Curtis Porter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1204-CR-191
Criminal. Affirms conviction and 40-year sentence for Class A felony child molesting.

Ivan Gonzalez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
43A03-1207-CR-334
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class D felony intimidation and a count of Class B misdemeanor visiting a common nuisance.

Oo Aka v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1207-CR-560
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony and a Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

Andrew Abbott v. State of Indiana (NFP)
33A01-1201-CR-16
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony receiving stolen property, but remands to the trial court for proceedings to recalculate pretrial detention credit for time served.

Gateway West Townhouse Association, Barry J. Stern and Judy C. Stern v. Metropolitan Development Commission of Marion County v. SF Industrial Properties-Indianapolis, LLC (NFP)
49A02-1208-MI-680
Miscellaneous/zoning. Affirms trial court dismissal of a petition for judicial review of a zoning variance granted to SF Industrial.

Allen G. Parker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-CR-503
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder, robbery and confinement.

Jamie Farmer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A04-1208-CR-448
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class B felony dealing in a schedule II controlled substance.

Scott Rose v. J.Z. and J.Z. (Adoptive Parents) (NFP)

32A05-1207-AD-361
Adoption. Affirms trial court denial of motion to set aside adoption decree.

Benito S. Gamba, Hilda P. Gamba and Gamba Real Estate Holdings, LLC v. The Ross Group Inc./Ticor Title Insurance Co. v. The Ross Group Inc., Benito Gamba, Hilda Gamba, et al. (NFP)
45A03-1202-PL-92
Civil plenary. Reaffirms in rehearing prior ruling that the Gamba interests are liable for a construction-cost overage.

J.W.S. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-1207-JV-373
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a juvenile delinquent for what would have been a Class D felony conviction of criminal gang activity if committed by an adult.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court issued no opinions by IL deadline. 7th Circuit Court of Appeal issued 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