ILNews

Opinions May 25, 2011

May 25, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Roche Diagnostics Corp. v. Medical Automation Systems Inc., et al.
11-1446
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Modifies the District Court’s judgment of allowing the sale of MAS to Alere to proceed by incorporating the 11 hold-separate conditions listed in the 7th Circuit’s opinion. Alere and MAS can close their transaction if they respect those conditions and the District Court’s requirement that Roche receive its unimpaired period of exclusive use of MAS’ diabetes-product software. The District Court issued an injunction implementing its decision and it expires as soon as the arbitrator renders a decision or at the end of 2012 if the arbitrator hasn’t acted.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Indiana Court of Appeals
Estate of Bradley Kinser, et al. v. Indiana Insurance Company
29A02-1009-PL-1093
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Indiana Insurance on its motion for declaratory judgment that it’s not obligated to cover any losses following Bradley Kinser’s accident and death while driving his girlfriend’s car because his policy excluded coverage for a vehicle furnished or available for his regular use. A genuine issue of material fact remains as to the scope and extent that Kinser felt he needed his girlfriend’s permission to drive her car, which affects the determination of whether the car was furnished or available for his regular use.

Clint Cullen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
31A04-1009-CR-626
Criminal. Affirms denial of verified petition for judicial review of alleged refusal to submit to a chemical test.

Paternity of C.C.; M.L. v. J.C. (NFP)
15A01-1009-JP-534
Juvenile. Affirms order modifying physical custody of son in favor of child’s father.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.S.; C.S. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
49A05-1010-JT-719
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Anthony Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1010-CR-1439
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony intimidation while drawing or using a deadly weapon and Class D felony domestic battery in the presence of a child less than 16 years of age.


Joseph Wright v. Aquavalyn Wright (NFP)
45A03-1010-DR-556
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of petition for modification of child support.

Jimmy E. Griffin II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1008-CR-919
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class C felony attempted battery and reverses conviction of Class C felony battery.

Otis Allen Tate, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1009-CR-529
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.

Keith McClaran, et al. v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (NFP)
55A01-1006-MF-289
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms judgment and grant of foreclosure to MERS as nominee for GMAC Mortgage Corp.

Elliott J. Welch v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-CR-673
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

Mark Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
43A04-1011-CR-697
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Michael Nordman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A02-1005-CR-638
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony intimidation.

Timothy S. Hanna v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A05-1009-CR-557
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony criminal deviate conduct and two counts of Class C misdemeanor furnishing alcohol to a minor.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT