ILNews

Opinions May 24, 2013

May 24, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Rebirth Christian Academy Daycare, Inc. v. Indiana Family & Social Services Administration
49A04-1209-MI-467
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of the daycare’s motion to dissolve and/or modify the order in the First Amended Agreement Judgment between the daycare and FSSA. The trial court properly determined that Rebirth cannot employ LaSonda Carter pursuant to I.C. 12-17.2-6-14 despite an earlier trial court order restricting access to her criminal record.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of J.C., Et.C. & El.C.; S.C. v. Indiana Department of Child Services
29A02-1210-JT-833
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights. DCS presented sufficient evidence that the conditions resulting in the children’s removal were not likely to be remedied, and the findings support the court’s conclusion that termination was in the best interests of the children. There was a suitable plan in place for the care and treatment of the children.

Paul Hassfurther v. State of Indiana
26A01-1208-CR-350
Criminal. Affirms denial of Hassfurther’s petition for judicial review. The evidence established probable cause that Hassfurther had been driving while intoxicated and that he knowingly refused to take a chemical test for intoxication.

Angela Duckworth v. Christopher R. Duckworth

29A02-1208-DR-669
Domestic relation. Affirms order modifying custody and child support in favor of father Christopher Duckworth. Mother did not submit a child support worksheet or other evidence of her income, so the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it determined her obligation based on the income the father assigned to her on his child support worksheet.

In Re The Paternity of J.T. and I.T., Minor Children; and In Re The Support of C.R.T., Minor Child; R.A.P., Mother v. C.D.T., Father
46A05-1210-JP-544
Juvenile. Affirms order granting sole legal and physical custody of the children to father. The evidence establishes a substantial change in the interrelationship of the parties, which allows for a modification of custody. Mother routinely denied father parenting time to which he was entitled.

Leo Dent, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

45A03-1208-CR-362
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion for relief from judgment.

Dennis Meyer v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1206-PC-547
Post conviction. Affirms denial of amended petition for post-conviction relief.

K.L.W. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1211-JV-609
Juvenile. Affirms placement in a youth facility for committing what would be Class D felony theft if committed by an adult.

Brant Construction, LLC; and Dune Harbor, LLC v. Circle R. Electric, Inc.; DeBoer Egolf Corp.; Auditor, Porter County, Indiana; First National Bank of Illinois; and Wachovia Financial Srvcs., Inc. (NFP)
64A03-1204-CC-159
Civil collection. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Circle R as against Brant, but affirms in favor of Circle R as against Dune Harbor. Remands for calculation of attorney fees.

Leona Peavler v. State of Indiana (NFP)

48A02-1209-CR-775
Criminal. Affirms order Peavler be incarcerated for violating the terms of her home detention by using methamphetamine.  

Henry (Hank) Eilts, Hank's Construction, and The G. Jackie Eilts Credit Shelter Trust v. Jeremy Wayman (NFP)
85A02-1208-PL-627
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court ruling that found Eilts agreed to grant Wayman an easement on a farm as part of a project to fix a drainage issue.

Jeremy Roberts v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A05-1211-CR-563
Criminal. Affirms revocation of community corrections placement.

In Re: The Petition for the Adoption of: R.J. and S.J. (Minor Children), R.J. and L.L. v. A.G. and B.G. (NFP)
02A03-1209-AD-403
Adoption. Affirms order denying mother’s motion to withdraw her consent to the adoption and declaring father’s motion to contest the adoption as untimely and his consent irrevocably implied.

Randall Dorsett v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1208-CR-623
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony arson, murder and Class B felony robbery.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: J.N. (Minor Child), and JE.N. (Father) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
08A02-1212-JT-1010
Juvenile. Affirms termination of father’s parental rights.

James M. Durkin, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1207-CR-314
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class A felony robbery.

Tony Monks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
87A01-1209-CR-405
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress.

A.R. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1210-JV-810
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent for committing two acts that would be Class A misdemeanor battery if committed by an adult.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no decisions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT