ILNews

Opinions - May 26, 2010

May 27, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Tracey Wallace and Eric Wallace v. Jonathan S. McGlothan
07-4059
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Judge Larry J. McKinney
Civil. Affirms jury verdict in favor of and damages in the amount of $700,000 to the Wallaces following their diversity suit against Dr. McGlothan. The Wallaces sued Dr. McGlothan for medical malpractice following surgery he performed on Tracey Wallace to correct her vision problems. The procedure ended up causing more harm than good.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions before IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Donald T. Shell v. State of Indiana
48A02-0904-CR-325
Criminal. Affirms Shell’s convictions of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, Class D felony possession of marijuana, Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance, and two counts of Class D felony possession of a controlled substance. Also affirms sentenced of an aggregate term of 18 years.

Julie Smitson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-0911-CR-660
Criminal. Affirms revocation of Smitson’s probation.

Ricky L. Rust v. State of Indiana (NFP)
80A04-0907-CR-428
Criminal. Affirms Rust’s convictions of and sentences for Class D felony criminal recklessness, Class C felony battery, and Class B felony criminal confinement.

Lawrence Echols v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0908-CR-752
Criminal. Affirms Echols’ convictions of and sentences for Class D felony intimidation, and Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

Janyer Pinto v. State of Indiana (NFP)
03A01-0908-CR-427
Criminal. Affirms Pinto’s convictions of and sentences for Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated and Class D felony resisting law enforcement.

Salvador A. Perez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1001-CR-35
Criminal. Affirms Perez’ conviction of and sentence for failure to register as a sex offender, a Class D felony.

John Pemberton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0910-CR-1054
Criminal. Affirms Pemberton’s conviction of child molesting, a Class A felony.

Edgar Mendizabal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0909-PC-899
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of Mendizabal’s petition for post-conviction relief.

Russell Ralston v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0909-CR-929
Criminal. Affirms Ralston’s conviction of Class B felony aggravated battery. Reverses trial court’s order for Ralston to pay the public defender fee without determining his ability to pay and remands.

Marcos Espinosa v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1002-CR-67
Criminal. Affirms Espinosa’s conviction of and sentence for Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor following his guilty plea.

Erick George Black v. Marcy Ann Black (NFP)
37A04-0909-CV-552
Civil. Reverses and remand’s trial court’s order that reduced father Erick George Black’s child support obligation, but did not modify the tax exemptions for the dependent children. Father argued he should owe no child support because he is the custodial parent, and that he should receive the tax exemptions for both children.

Anthony E. Griffin Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-0912-CR-575
Criminal. Affirms Griffin’s conviction of rape, a Class B felony.

Adoption of T.L.J.; R.O. v. C.J. (NFP)
71A05-0912-CV-691
Civil. Affirms trial court’s grant of a petition to adopt T.L.J. filed by C.J. (stepmother). R.O. (mother) had appealed.

Matter of L.W. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0911-JV-1119
Juvenile. Affirms L.W.’s adjudication as a delinquent child for committing resisting law enforcement, which would be a Class A misdemeanor if committed by an adult.

State of Indiana v. Patrick J. Davis (NFP)
02A05-1001-CR-7
Criminal. Reverses and remands trial court’s order dismissing the state’s petition to revoke Davis’ probation. Finds it need not be established that the defendant was explicitly advised that he is prohibited from committing new offenses while on probation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions before IL deadline.

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