ILNews

Opinions Nov. 16, 2011

November 16, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Green River Motel Management of Dale, LLC, et al. v. State of Indiana
74A05-1104-PL-169
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of Green River’s motion for summary judgment. A state action that merely alters the flow of traffic or causes access by a more circuitous route can’t give rise to a taking as a matter of law. Affirms on all other respects.

Geneva-Roth Capital, Inc., et al. v. Akeala Edwards
49A02-1101-PL-43
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of LoanPoint USA’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration in a putative class action lawsuit filed by Edwards and a purported class of people who got small, short-term payday loans from LoanPoint USA. Having concluded that the National Arbitration Forum as the arbitral forum was integral to the arbitration agreement, and given that the NAF is no longer available to conduct consumer arbitrations, the arbitration provision is null and void on grounds of impossibility.

Daniel Stevenson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1103-CR-124
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony child molesting and sexual misconduct with a minor as a Class B felony and a Class C felony.

M.J. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1103-JV-329
Juvenile. Affirms dispositional order that found M.J. to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation.

Roy M. Strong and Independent Associates, Inc. v. Bertha McKinster, individually and as Attorney in fact for Robert McKinster (NFP)
49A02-1010-PL-1167
Civil plenary. Affirms jury verdict awarding Bertha McKinster $643,200 in damages on her suit for conversion, securities fraud, racketeering, breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and negligence.

Willie Andrew Alsanders v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1104-CR-136
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony operating a motor vehicle after lifetime suspension of driving privileges.

Lewis R. Ross, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A04-1103-CR-172
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

D.B. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1103-JV-166
Juvenile. Affirms true finding that D.B. committed what would be Class C felony child molesting if committed by an adult.

Joseph D. Miller v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1105-CR-204
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class A felony child molesting.

Michael K. Boone v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1104-CR-187
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

Gerald D. James v. State of Indiana (NFP)
88A05-1104-CR-250
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Justin B. Troxell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1104-CR-352
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation after Troxell was charged with attempted rape and conspiracy to commit rape.

Elvis A. Hall v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1106-CR-587
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony theft.

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