ILNews

Opinions May 24, 2012

May 24, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Finance Center Federal Credit Union v. Ronnie D. Brand, Debora J. Brand and GMAC Mortgage, LLC
49A02-1111-MF-1089
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms partial summary judgment in favor of GMAC regarding the priority of the GMAC Mortgage and Finance Center Federal Credit Union mortgages. Equity should not allow the Finance Center to gain an unexpectedly elevated priority because of any negligence of GMAC that did not harm Finance Center.

Samantha Adams v. State of Indiana
49A05-1107-CR-372
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to dismiss. The trial court did not deny Adams due process in denying her motions to dismiss her dealing and possession of marijuana charges. Finds the definition of marijuana is not vague and Indiana Code 35-48-4-11 is not unconstitutional.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of K.N., C.M., and K.M.; M.M. (Mother) and C.M. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
79A04-1109-JT-541
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Charles Hunter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1111-CR-1000
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and imposition of the five-year suspended portion of Hunter’s sentence.

Christopher Master v. State of Indiana (NFP)
65A01-1108-CR-361
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felonies rape and criminal deviate conduct.

Darryl Anderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1107-CR-601
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony rape, Class C felony criminal confinement and Class A misdemeanor battery.

David West v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1111-CR-1013
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following revocation of probation.

Bret Beiler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
38A02-1109-CR-839
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

In Re the Paternity of B.C., M.L. v. D.N., Jr. (NFP)
05A02-1110-JP-964
Juvenile. Reverses decision to set aside paternity affidavit executed by D.C. and N.E. and the May 26, 2009, paternity order.

John W. Mitchell v. American Acceptance Co., LLC, as Assignee of Chase Bank USA, N.A. (NFP)
02A03-1108-CC-366
Civil collection. Affirms grant of summary judgment to American Acceptance Co. on its complaint for collection of credit card debt.

Joshua M. Santiago v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A01-1109-CR-493
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for Class B felonies stalking and burglary, Class D felony intimidation, Class A misdemeanors invasion of privacy, battery and resisting law enforcement, Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief, and adjudication as a habitual offender.

 

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