ILNews

Opinions Nov. 22, 2011

November 22, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinions were posted after IL deadline Monday:
Estate of Christine L. Neterer, Deceased; Deborah Pollock and Marilyn Humbarger, Co-Personal Representatives v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue
49T10-1006-TA-26
Tax. Affirms probate court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Indiana Department of Revenue, holding that Neterer is not entitled to a refund of estate tax, because she was unable to prove that she was entitled to a 30 percent discount, and that the Value of Decedent’s Interest in Real Estate was unverified, unsigned, prepared by an anonymous person and failed to disclose how the 30 percent discount was calculated.

Gordon A. Etzler v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue

45T10-1105-TA-38
Tax. Dismisses appeal on the grounds that the Tax Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, holding that Etzler’s complaint is not about Indiana’s tax laws, but rather about a collection matter arising from a final judgment against Dodson in Marshall Circuit Court.

Today’s opinions:

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

Indiana Supreme Court
Lisa Gray v. State of Indiana

82S01-1106-CR-328
Criminal. Reinstates trial court’s guilty verdict on Gray’s charge of Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana, rejecting the argument that insufficient evidence existed to support her conviction. Holds that the word of two police officers held more influence with the trial court than the testimony of Gray’s son, whom Gray appeared to be coaching during trial about how to answer questions.

Indiana Court of Appeals
DeGood Dimensional Concepts, Inc. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development (NFP)
93A02-1104-EX-390
Miscellaneous. Affirms Indiana Department of Workforce Development Review Board’s finding that substantial evidence exists to support the argument that DeGood Dimensional Concepts failed to prove that employee John Wilder violated a reasonable and uniformly enforced attendance rule. Reverses board and administrative law judge’s conclusion that Wilder would not have been discharged except for the existence of all the reasons stated by the employer. Remands for consideration of those reasons and for additional findings as to whether Wilder was discharged for just cause.

Amanda D. Brown v. State of Indiana
62A01-1105-CR-224
Criminal. Reverses sentence and remands to trial court to recalculate credit for time served and for hearing on whether Brown is entitled to credit time for the days she participated in a drug-treatment program.

Thormonn Lawrence v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1104-CR-152
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class A misdemeanor battery and Class D felony domestic battery.

Steven R. Farrell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
04A03-1101-CR-21
Criminal. Affirms conviction of murder and sentence for murder and Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Katina D. Logan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1104-CR-186
Criminal. Affirms sentences for Class D felony neglect of a dependent and associated charges.

Durell Rhymes v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1104-CR-371
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class D felony theft.  

Timothy Wright v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1005-CR-490
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

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. I work with some older lawyers in the 70s, 80s, and they are sharp as tacks compared to the foggy minded, undisciplined, inexperienced, listless & aimless "youths" being churned out by the diploma mill law schools by the tens of thousands. A client is generally lucky to land a lawyer who has decided to stay in practice a long time. Young people shouldn't kid themselves. Experience is golden especially in something like law. When you start out as a new lawyer you are about as powerful as a babe in the cradle. Whereas the silver halo of age usually crowns someone who can strike like thunder.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. "...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.

ADVERTISEMENT