ILNews

Opinions May 17, 2011

May 17, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Shannon S. Barabas, et al.
48A04-1004-CC-232
Civil collection. Affirms grant of amended default judgment in favor of ReCasa Financial Group and Rick Sanders. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it found that Indiana Code Section 32-29-8-3 precluded Citimortgage’s claim because Citimortgage failed to intervene more than a year after it first acquired interest in the property. When Irwin Mortgage filed a petition and disclaimed its interest in the foreclosure, MERS, as mere nominee and holder of nothing more than bare legal title to the mortgage, did not have an enforceable right under the mortgage separate from the interest held by Irwin Mortgage. Judge Brown dissents.

R.P. & L.P., Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; N.P. v. I.D.C.S.
84A05-1010-JC-650
Juvenile. Affirms findings that the children are children in need of services. The trial court had jurisdiction even though it failed to conduct a fact-finding hearing within the 60-day statutory time limit. The Department of Child Services produced sufficient evidence to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that R.P. and L.P. are CHINS. The trial court’s findings did not violate the mother’s right to procedural due process.

Ronald E. Lewis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
87A04-1008-CR-535
Criminal. Affirms in part the denial of credit time. Reverses in part as it appears Lewis didn’t receive credit time for one day and remands to the trial court to credit him with one additional day of time served while confined awaiting sentencing for another case.  

Jill (Lambert) Fox v. Jeffrey Lambert (NFP)
32A01-1010-DR-524
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment, finding Jill Fox in contempt and extending parenting time in favor of Jeffrey Lambert.

Shonk Electric, Inc. v. Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. (NFP)
55A05-1009-CC-554
Civil collection. Affirms entry of summary judgment in favor of Siemens and award of attorney fees in favor of Siemens. Remands for the trial court to determine Siemens’ appellate attorney fees.

David H. Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1009-CR-1100
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea but mentally ill to two counts of child molesting, one as a Class A felony, one as a Class C felony.

Deborah P. Keever v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1010-CR-525
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor false informing.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT