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. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT