ILNews

Opinions Nov. 23, 2011

November 23, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Christopher Pavey v. Patrick Conley
10-3878
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Robert L. Miller.
Criminal. Affirms District Court’s dismissal of Pavey’s suit for failure to exhaust administrative remedies for an injury that occurred while incarcerated. Holds that Pavey was aware, based on his prior experience, of proper channels for filing grievances.

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Town of Avon v. West Central Conservancy District, Washington Township, and Ronnie Austin, in his capacity as Trustee and Park Governor
32S05-1104-PL-217
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court’s denial of Avon’s motion for summary judgment, holding underground aquifers are “watercourses” as defined by state law and therefore community officials have the ability to reasonably regulate how that water is withdrawn and used by other local governments. Remands for proceedings consistent with opinion.

Today’s opinions:

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Monica Del Carmen Gonzalez-Servin, et. al. v. Fort Motor Company, et. al.
11-1665
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. In a consolidated appeal, the court affirmed decisions by District Courts in Indiana and Illinois granting forum non conveniens in multidistrict litigation. In the Indiana case, the court held that Judge Sarah Evans Barker was acting within her discretion in deciding that the courts of Mexico would be better suited to adjudication of a lawsuit by Mexican citizens arising from the death of another Mexican citizen in an accident in Mexico.

Fort Wayne Telsat Inc. v. JAS Partners, LTD.
11-2112
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Civil. Affirms District Court’s determination that the trustee had acted reasonably in settling the debtor’s claim against Indiana University for $100,000.

Indiana Court of Appeals
State of Indiana v. James D. Eichorst
71A03-1102-CR-105
Criminal. Reverses trial court’s determination that Eichorst did not meet the criteria for an enhanced sentence under Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-3, holding that the court erred in its interpretation of the statute. Remands for proceedings consistent with opinion.  

State of Indiana v. Kevin Lee Traver
71A04-1102-CR-131
Criminal. Reverses trial court’s determination that Traver did not meet the criteria for an enhanced sentence under Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-3, holding that the court erred in its interpretation of the statute. Remands for proceedings consistent with opinion.  

State of Indiana v. Donald Loren Wilson
71A05-1102-CR-130
Criminal. Reverses trial court’s determination that Wilson did not meet the criteria for an enhanced sentence under Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-3, holding that the court erred in its interpretation of the statute. Remands for proceedings consistent with opinion.  

Commitment of T.S. v. Logansport State Hospital
79A02-1101-MH-86
Mental health. Affirms trial court’s decision denying T.S.’s request to be removed from the Sexual Responsibility Program at Logansport State Hospital, holding that the state presented testimony from experts that T.S. was still in need of treatment offered by the program.

Gordon B. Dempsey and Gordon B. Dempsey, PC v. Todd H. Belanger
49A04-1104-CT-201
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s denial of Dempsey’s motion to reinstate his complaint against attorney Todd H. Belanger. Holds that appellate attorney fees are warranted and remands for the limited purpose of determining Belanger’s appellate attorney fees.

Ronnie Sanders v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1105-CR-241
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor battery.

L.E. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and F.W.C.S. (NFP)
93A02-1104-EX-445
Miscellaneous. Remands to Indiana Department of Workforce Development’s Review Board to correct calculation error in reduction of L.E.’s unemployment benefits.

Kay Kim and Charles Chuang v. Village at Eagle Creek Homeowners Association c/o Community Association Services of Indiana; and Chubb Custom Insurance Co. (NFP)
49A02-1106-CT-479
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s summary judgment in favor of appellee-defendant and affirms trial court’s dismissal of appellants’ complaint against Chubb Custom Insurance.

Bryce D. Pope v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1103-PC-153
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Taimeka Garnett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1104-CR-192
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication.

David Gardner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1104-CR-198
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

Christina Francis v. City of Indianapolis (NFP)
49A02-1104-OV-303
Local ordinance. Affirms trial court’s judgment finding Francis in violation of Indianapolis-Marion County Ordinance No. 531-102 for having a dog at large.

Robert and Heather Taylor v. Charles B. Caldwell (NFP)
03A04-1105-CT-254
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s decision denying damages for Heather Taylor’s alleged permanent injuries.

In the Matter of J.M.R., Child in Need of Services, M.R. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
02A03-1105-JV-273
Juvenile. Affirms juvenile court’s finding that J.M.R. is a child in need of services.

George Kotsopoulos v. Peters Broadcast Engineering, Inc. (NFP)
02A03-1012-PL-675
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s denial of Kotsopoulos’ motion to correct error and judgment in favor of Peters Broadcast Engineering (PBE). Per PBE’s concession that Kotsopoulos is not individually liable, remands to the court to amend judgment by removing his individual liability for the judgment.

The Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions by 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. If real money was spent on this study, what a shame. And if some air-head professor tries to use this to advance a career, pity the poor student. I am approaching a time that i (and others around me) should be vigilant. I don't think I'm anywhere near there yet, but seeing the subject I was looking forward to something I might use to look for some benchmarks. When finally finding my way to the hidden questionnaire all I could say to myself was...what a joke. Those are open and obvious signs of any impaired lawyer (or non-lawyer, for that matter), And if one needs a checklist to discern those tell-tale signs of impairment at any age, one shouldn't be practicing law. Another reason I don't regret dropping my ABA membership some number of years ago.

  2. The case should have been spiked. Give the kid a break. He can serve and maybe die for Uncle Sam and can't have a drink? Wow. And they won't even let him defend himself. What a gross lack of prosecutorial oversight and judgment. WOW

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT