Opinions May 12, 2011

May 12, 2011
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
State ex rel. Gregory F. Zoeller v. Aisin USA Manufacturing, Inc.
Civil. Holds the attorney general’s attempt to recover a “tax refund” from Aisin in Jackson Superior Court may proceed. It does not arise under the tax laws because the “refund” was the result of accounting and clerical errors with in the Department of Revenue that were wholly unrelated to any interpretation or application of tax law. Justices Rucker and Dickson dissent.

Richard L. Barnes v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor battery on a law enforcement officer, Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement, and Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct. There is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers, so the trial court didn’t err in failing to give Barnes’ proffered jury instruction on this right, and the evidence was sufficient to support Barnes’ convictions. Justices Rucker and Dickson dissent.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Commissioner of Labor on the Relation of Vincent and Antimo Scialdone v. An Island, LLC
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of An Island LLC’s motion to dismiss for improper venue and order the case transferred to Perry County. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it determined that Perry County was the only preferred venue for the case.

Erodney Davis v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony possession of cocaine. The trial court did err by permitting a police detective to testify as a skilled witness, but it was a harmless error. The trial court did not err by excluding evidence of a witness’s prior drug-related convictions or by giving an additional instruction to the jury that it had inadvertently omitted from the final jury instructions.

Jameson Malbrough v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony child molesting, and one count each of Class C felony child molesting, Class D felony vicarious sexual gratification, and Class D felony intimidation.

James Spann v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor obstructing traffic.

Rodney Griffin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of R.A., et al.; A.L. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Lloyd Conn v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony conspiracy to commit murder. The evidence is sufficient to sustain his conviction.

Robert A. Jordan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Post conviction. Affirms denial of request for additional educational credit time.

Thomas Huffine v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence following revocation of probation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues