ILNews

Opinions May 28, 2014

May 28, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Hamilton County Assessor v. SPD Realty, LLC
49T10-1104-TA-28
Tax. Affirms the Board of Tax Review’s final determination that SPD Realty’s real and personal property qualified for a charitable purposes exemption for the 2009 tax year. The board’s final determination is not contrary to law and unsupported by substantial evidence because New Life occupied and used the property for a charitable purpose; SPD owned the property for a charitable purpose; and the property was predominately used for charitable purposes.

Wednesday’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Joshua Bunn v. Khoury Enterprises Inc.
13-2292
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Bunn’s former employer, a Dairy Queen franchise, on his claims that his employer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. Bunn’s failure-to-accommodate claim falls short because his employer did reasonably accommodate his disability. His disparate treatment claim fails because he has not introduced sufficient evidence to create a triable issue of material fact and because the undisputed facts show that the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Craig Alvey v. State of Indiana
20A04-1310-MI-533
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of Alvey’s petition to expunge the records of his conviction. He did not meet all the requirements of the expungement statute because he admitted twice to violating his probation before successfully completing his sentence.

Melisa R. Digbie v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Eaglecare LLC
93A02-1312-EX-1054
Agency action. Reverses decision of the Review Board of the Department of Workforce Development in favor of Eaglecare LLC on Digbie’s claim for unemployment benefits and its determination that Digbie received notice of the Aug. 6 hearing. The DWD presented no evidence that it mailed notice of the hearing to Digbie, so it was not entitled to the rebuttable presumption that she received notice. Remands for a new evidentiary hearing.

Tyrece Robertson v. State of Indiana
49A05-1310-CR-487
Criminal. Reverses convictions of Class D felony attempted residential entry and Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief. The trial court erred when it overruled Robertson’s Baston challenge contesting the state’s use of a peremptory challenge to strike a juror.

A.H. v. State of Indiana
49A05-1309-JV-450
Juvenile. Affirms juvenile court’s restitution order requiring A.H. to provide restitution to the probation department for the electronic monitoring bracelet she cut off and left at a park. The admission agreement left disposition open to the juvenile court and the court did not fail to inquire into her ability to pay.

Jeremy L. Honaker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
39A01-1306-PC-291
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Napoleon Wilson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1308-CR-434
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress the results of a traffic stop.

Jory D. Peters v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1305-CR-177
Criminal. Affirms murder conviction.

Idowa Hood v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1309-CR-828
Criminal. Reverses sentence and orders trial court to resentence Hood and calculate his pretrial credit time in accordance with I.C. 35-38-3-2(b)(4).

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: S.S. (Minor Child), and S.S. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1309-JT-784
Juvenile. Affirms order denying mother’s motion for relief under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) and involuntarily terminating her parental rights.

Rachel M. Swaney and Eric Swaney v. Chrysler Group LLC and Grieger's Motor Sales, Inc. (NFP)
64A03-1401-CT-25
Civil tort. Reverses dismissal of the Swaneys’ complaint for failure to prosecute and remands for further proceedings.

Gary Maxwell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1308-CR-427
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated in a manner that endangers a person.  

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: A.C. (Minor Child) and E.C. (Mother) and R.C. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
48A02-1310-JT-875
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Johnnie Winford v. State of Indiana (NFP)

22A01-1307-CR-303
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent child.

Mercedes Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1311-CR-962
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor theft.

Jeffrey Duncan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1310-CR-456
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a BAC equivalent to 0.15 and determination as a habitual substance offender.

Kevin A. Deubner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1309-CR-439
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in community corrections program.

Deandrew Russell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1308-CR-389
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony criminal confinement.

Vincent W. Hren v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1310-CR-436
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felonies operating a vehicle as a habitual traffic violator and operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Michael Widup v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1310-CR-861
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class A felony child molesting and three convictions of Class C felony child molesting but vacates one conviction of Class C felony child molesting as it violates double jeopardy. Vacates sentence imposed on that count.

William Crockett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1307-PC-374
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Jesse Clements v. Davina Curry (NFP)
49A02-1308-CT-713
Civil tort. Affirms dismissal of Clements’ counterclaim, reverses grant of summary judgment to Curry and remands for a hearing.

Rashawn Speed v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1308-CR-696
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony child molesting, Class C felony child molesting and Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Steve D. Boyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1310-CR-438
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class B felony dealing in narcotics.

Justin M. Alexander v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1310-CR-403, 02A03-1310-CR-404, 02A03-1310-CR-405
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentences in three separate, but related, criminal appeals. Remands for clarification of the sentencing orders.

Jason Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1310-CR-891
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony residential entry, Class A misdemeanor interference with reporting a crime and Class A misdemeanor conversion.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline Wednesday.
 

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