ILNews

Opinions May 23, 2013

May 23, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Tommy L. Morris, personal representative of the estate of Thomas Lynn Morris v. Salvatore Nuzzo
12-3220
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Vacates the dismissal of the claims of Tommy Morris against Nuzzo. The District Court erred in its determination that Nuzzo was fraudulently joined. Remands with instructions the case be further remanded to the Trumbull County Common Pleas Court of Ohio.

Indiana Court of Appeals
United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company v. Warsaw Chemical Company, Inc.
49A04-1203-CT-97
Civil tort. Reverses finding that the 1992 release of USF&G from claims or demands related to remediation did not bar coverage under the excess policies and judgment entered in favor of Warsaw for $417,953. Because the release covered the excess policies, the trial court erred in denying USF&G’s summary judgment motion on this point. Remands for entry of judgment in favor of the insurer.

City of Carmel, through its Redevelopment Commission v. Crider & Crider, Inc., Hagerman Construction Corporation
02A04-1208-PL-416
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of the city of Carmel’s motion to transfer venue in the lawsuit filed by Crider & Crider Inc. Hamilton County is the appropriate venue by virtue of Trial Rule 21(B).

C.N. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A05-1210-JV-521
Juvenile. Affirms finding that C.N. committed what would be Class D felony auto theft if committed by an adult.

Roy Austin Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1209-PC-783
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Ernest P. Glass v. State of Indiana (NFP)
54A04-1210-CR-552
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class A misdemeanor battery and the revocation of Glass’ probation.

Kristol Toms v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1211-CR-585
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in community corrections for committing a new offense and violating terms of placement.

George A. Reese, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

31A05-1206-CR-309
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting.

Samuel Fancher v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1210-PC-790
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Joseph D. Hardiman and Jaketa L. Patterson, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of Britney R. Meux, Deceased v. Jason R. Cozmanoff (NFP)
45A03-1210-CT-437
Civil tort. Reverses order staying discovery but affirms order that Cozmanoff file an answer to the estate’s complaint. Remands for further proceedings.

Norman A. Ellis, Sr. v. Sikanyiso Ellis (NFP)

49A02-1201-DR-62
Domestic relation. Affirms order dissolving the parties’ marriage.

Charles Kootz v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1209-PC-721
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Jose Perez v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A05-1208-CR-418
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony robbery.

In the Matter of the Involuntary Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of P.M., A.T. & A.P., Minor Children, and their Mother, S.T,; S.T. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
82A01-1212-JT-548
Juvenile. Reverses order terminating parental rights.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. @ President Snow, like they really read these comments or have the GUTS to show what is the right thing to do. They are just worrying about planning the next retirement party, the others JUST DO NOT CARE about what is right. Its the Good Ol'Boys - they do not care about the rights of the mother or child, they just care about their next vote, which, from what I gather, the mother left the state of Indiana because of the domestic violence that was going on through out the marriage, the father had three restraining orders on him from three different women, but yet, the COA judges sent a strong message, go ahead men put your women in place, do what you have to do, you have our backs... I just wish the REAL truth could be told about this situation... Please pray for this child and mother that God will some how make things right and send a miracle from above.

  2. I hear you.... Us Christians are the minority. The LGBTs groups have more rights than the Christians..... How come when we express our faith openly in public we are prosecuted? This justice system do not want to seem "bias" but yet forgets who have voted them into office.

  3. Perhaps the lady chief justice, or lady appellate court chief judge, or one of the many female federal court judges in Ind could lead this discussion of gender disparity? THINK WITH ME .... any real examples of race or gender bias reported on this ezine? But think about ADA cases ... hmmmm ... could it be that the ISC actually needs to tighten its ADA function instead? Let's ask me or Attorney Straw. And how about religion? Remember it, it used to be right up there with race, and actually more protected than gender. Used to be. Patrick J Buchanan observes: " After World War II, our judicial dictatorship began a purge of public manifestations of the “Christian nation” Harry Truman said we were. In 2009, Barack Obama retorted, “We do not consider ourselves to be a Christian nation.” Secularism had been enthroned as our established religion, with only the most feeble of protests." http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/is-secession-a-solution-to-cultural-war/#q3yVdhxDVMMxiCmy.99 I could link to any of my supreme court filings here, but have done that more than enough. My case is an exclamation mark on what PJB writes. BUT not in ISC, where the progressives obsess on race and gender .... despite a lack of predicate acts in the past decade. Interested in reading more on this subject? Search for "Florida" on this ezine.

  4. Great questions to six jurists. The legislature should open a probe to investigate possible government corruption. Cj rush has shown courage as has justice Steven David. Who stands with them?

  5. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

ADVERTISEMENT