ILNews

Opinions Nov. 19, 2013

November 19, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Gersh Zavodnik v. Michela Rinaldi, et al
49S05-1311-CT-759
Civil tort. Reverses order of dismissal and remands to the trial court for further proceedings without prejudice to dismissal under Trial Rule 41(E) if warranted after further consideration.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Anthony Scott Bratcher v. State of Indiana 
90A02-1301-CR-3
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2013/november/11191302rrp.pdf
Criminal. Affirms 15-year executed sentence for conviction of Class B felony child molesting, finding that the sentence was not a maximum, since five years of the 20-year term was suspended to probation, and the sentence was not inappropriate. The majority also affirmed a condition of probation restricting Bratcher’s contact with children, but Judge Terry Crone dissented on that issue, finding the condition was unconstitutionally vague.

Fawn McDonald-Woolridge v. Jacob Woolridge (NFP)
53A01-1204-DR-593
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s admitting evidence and finding McDonald-Woolridge in contempt. Remands for trial court to revise order allowing the supervising agency to determine when the father’s parenting time would become unsupervised. Also remands for trial court to re-evaluate make-up parenting time and who should best pay for supervised parenting time.

Lindsey J. Barger v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A05-1303-CR-136
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class A misdemeanor battery.

Laray Carter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1304-CR-127
Criminal. Affirms conviction for arson, a Class B felony, and resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor.

Morgan Govan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1302-PC-91
Post conviction. Affirms denial of Govan’s petition for post-conviction relief.

The Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

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