ILNews

Opinions Nov. 21, 2011

November 21, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


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

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. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  2. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  3. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  4. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  5. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

ADVERTISEMENT