ILNews

  • Home

Opinions Nov. 21, 2011

November 21, 2011
Keywords
Opinions
Back to TopE-mailPrint


7th Circuit Court of Appeals had issued no opinions as of IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court had issued no opinions as of IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jim Norris v. Personal Finance
27A04-1104-SC-183
Small claim. Reverses trial court’s decision denying Norris relief, holding that the trial court erred in concluding that under Trial Rule 4.16, Norris’ parents – when served a notice of claim against Norris – had a duty to inform the court that Norris did not live with them.

Adron Herschel Tancil v. State of Indiana
45A03-1101-CR-10
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion for a new trial, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion. Cites a previous Indiana Supreme Court decision stating that intent to kill can be inferred from the nature of the attack, including the duration, brutality and relative strengths of the defendant and victim.

Janice L. Davis v. Shelter Insurance Companies, State Farm Insurance Companies, and Jennifer L. Culver
02A05-1105-CT-256
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of Culver and State Farm Insurance Companies, holding no genuine issue of material fact exists and that Davis failed to prove that her claim of equitable estoppel applies.

Myron L. Johnson v. State of Indiana
71A04-1103-CR-194
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation, holding that any failure by Michigan and Indiana to strictly comply with the Interstate Compact with respect to a probable cause hearing for Johnson before his transfer back to Indiana did not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction to revoke his probation, either as to subject matter or personal jurisdiction.

George B. Warren v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1004-CR-286
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for two counts of Class B felony robbery.

Dewayne L. Campbell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1102-CR-143
Criminal. Affirms convictions for Class B felony conspiracy to commit dealing in methamphetamine and associated charges.

Bruce King v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1105-CR-214
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s revocation of probation and order that King serve previously suspended sentence.

Leland K. Roberts v. Hart & Sons Realty, LLC (NFP)
33A01-1103-PL-116
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s judgment quieting title to a tract of land in favor of Hart & Sons Realty.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer

  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT