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. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT