ILNews

Opinions May 29, 2012

May 29, 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

Jason Tye Myers v. Charles R. Deets III, Deets & Kennedy, and Great American Insurance Group
79A02-1108-CT-771
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for Edward Kennedy and the law firm on Myers’ claim for fraud against them and Deets. Myers couldn’t show that either Kennedy or the law firm was liable for Deets’ alleged fraudulent conduct. Reverses grant of Great American Insurance Group’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and remands for further proceedings. Judge Riley concurs in part and dissents in part.

Sisters of St. Francis Health Services, Inc. v. EON Properties, LLC
45A05-1110-PL-587
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of EON Properties regarding the Sisters of St. Francis Health Services’ liability under the lease agreements to pay the last two years of rent after another tenant left the premises early, but reverses regarding EON’s alleged damages. Remands for the continuation of the underlying litigation regarding damages.

Jason B. Saunders v. State of Indiana
06A01-1111-CR-596
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and order Saunders serve the remainder of his previously suspended sentence. Saunders waived his delay and due process argument and the trial court did not err in ordering him to serve the entirety of his suspended sentence because of a probation violation.

Philip G. Yeary v. State of Indiana (NFP)
78A01-1111-CR-528
Criminal. Affirms denial of several motions challenging the authority and impartiality of the senior judge who presided over Yeary’s post-conviction motions.

James H. Privette v. Sherri E. Privette (Morris) (NFP)
30A01-1111-DR-534
Domestic relation. Affirms order James Privette pay Sherri Privette Morris an amount equal to 33 percent of certain pension payments he has received to date and that Morris is entitled to 33 percent of all future pension payments.

Richard Clark Shockley v. Tammie Anne Shockley (NFP)
79A02-1111-PO-1047
Protective order. Affirms in part the issuance of a protective order against Richard Shockley for the protection of his former wife and her fiancé. Reverses the protective order as to Shockley’s teenage daughter.

Laura L. Mosier v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Department of Health (NFP)
93A02-1112-EX-1092
Agency appeal. Affirms dismissal by review board of Mosier’s appeal of the decision she was discharged for just cause.

Michael D. McGee v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A04-1110-CR-566
Criminal. Affirms order revoking home detention and order McGee serve his entire sentence in the Department of Correction.

Ryan Sheckles v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A04-1108-CR-423
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for two counts of murder.

Damien Townsend v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1109-CR-471
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.

Cornelio Martinez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A02-1111-CR-1023
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated and determination that Martinez is a habitual controlled substance offender.

John R. Vicars v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1109-CR-403
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

The Indiana Supreme Court denied transfer to 15 cases for the week ending May 25.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT