ILNews

Opinions May 23, 2014

May 23, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Andrew J. Rogers v. Sigma Chi International Fraternity, Theta Pi of Sigma Chi, Ancil Jackson, Brian Mifflin, Jr., and Joshua Kearby
84A04-1305-CT-224
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for Sigma Chi International fraternity, its Terre Haute chapter and Jackson, Mifflin and Kearby on Rogers’ claim the defendants should have protected him from being assaulted at a party. Sigma Chi did not have possession of the premises where Rogers was injured, the defendants had no duty to protect him from the assault, and the International fraternity was not vicariously liable for the acts of the persons at the premises because it had no actual or apparent authority over them.

In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of C.P., C.P. v. Community Hospital North/Gallahue Mental Health
49A02-1309-MH-770
Mental health. Affirms 90-day involuntary commitment to Community Hospital North. The psychiatrist’s testimony provided clear and convincing evidence that C.P. was gravely disabled.

Kenneth Griesemer v. State of Indiana
49A04-1308-CR-382
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor patronizing a prostitute. Because the evidence most favorable to the state permits an inference only that the police induced Griesemer’s criminal behavior, but does not contain any evidence permitting an inference that Griesemer was predisposed to commit patronizing a prostitute, entrapment was established as a matter of law. Chief Judge Nancy Vaidik dissents.

Christopher Bell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A04-1309-CR-478
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder and Class C felony conspiracy to commit robbery.

Agav Properties, Avrohem Tkatch, and Elisheva Tkatch v. The City of South Bend and The South Bend Fire Department (NFP)
71A04-1308-PL-396
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of motion to dismiss and motion of summary judgment filed by the city of South Bend and the fire department on claims alleging negligence, intentional interference with a contractual relationship and violation of state and federal constitutional rights.

Town of New Pekin, Indiana v. Gail Stewart and Kermit Stewart (NFP)
88A01-1310-PL-442
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of the town’s motion for summary judgment and remands to the trial court for adjudication by the finder of fact.

R & M Construction, Inc., and Lake County Trust Company, as Trustee Under a Trust Agreement Dated May 17, 1989 and Known as Trust No. 1901 v. Twin Lakes Utilities, Inc. (NFP)
Civil collection. Affirms summary judgment on R&M's and the trust’s claims and reverses summary judgment to Twin Lakes as to its claim for declaratory judgment. Remands for further proceedings on Twin Lakes' claims.

Michael Nero v. Citimortgage, Inc. (NFP)
52A02-1312-MF-1017
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms entry of summary judgment in favor of Citimortgage in its mortgage foreclosure action.

Adrian Walton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1307-CR-365
Criminal. Affirms murder conviction.

In re the Marriage of: Carla Weiler v. Kevin P. Weiler (NFP)
45A03-1310-DR-424
Domestic relation. Affirms in part and vacates in part husband’s motion to enforce decree of dissolution of marriage. Remands for the trial court to order the parties to ensure the marital residence is listed for sale.

Ronald DeWayne Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1310-CR-511
Criminal. Affirms denial of request for mistrial.

EMR Consulting, Inc. v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Laura Shipp (NFP)
93A02-1308-EX-691
Agency action. Affirms decision to grant Shipp unemployment benefits.

The Indiana Supreme Court and 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. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. 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?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT