ILNews

Opinions May 14, 2013

May 14, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
State of Indiana v. John Doe
49S00-1201-CT-14
Civil tort. Reverses judgment declaring I.C. 34-51-3-4, -5, and -6 impermissibly inconsistent with Article 1, Section 20 and Article 3, Section 1 of the Indiana Constitution. The cap and allocation scheme of punitive damages does not infringe upon the right to a jury trial, and the cap does not offend the separation of powers. Remands with instructions to grant Stewart’s motion to reduce the punitive damages to the statutory maximum and order that 75 percent of the award be deposited in the Violent Crime Victim Compensation Fund.  

Girl Scouts of Southern Illinois v. Vincennes Indiana Girls, Inc.
42S00-1210-PL-597
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court grant of summary judgment quieting title in Vincennes Indiana Girls Inc. Concludes that the Contracts Clause of the Indiana Constitution protects the enforceability of a 49-year land use limitation imposed by VIG despite a subsequently enacted statute, Indiana Code 32-17-10-2, that purports to limit reversionary clauses in land transactions to a maximum of 30 years. The dissolution of VIG did not terminate its existence or surrender its charter, and so its reversionary rights did not terminate by operation of the deed. Though the parties only intended the restriction to run for 49 years instead of indefinitely, their contract would nevertheless be substantially impaired if it were cut off after just 30 years by applying I.C. 32-17-10-2.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Terrence T. Walker v. State of Indiana
45A04-1208-CR-441
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony child molesting involving fondling or touching. Fundamental error did not occur as a result of any inadmissible testimony by the victim’s father. The trial court did not err in failing to instruct the jury on Class D felony sexual battery because it is not an inherently or factually included offense of Class C felony child molesting as charged. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in replacing the only African-American juror.

David A. Warner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
07A05-1207-CR-386
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine and Class B misdemeanor possession of a switchblade.

The Indiana 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. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT