Opinions Nov. 24, 2010

November 24, 2010
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Samuel Neal, Delores Neal and Hometown Transmissions, Inc. v. William J. Cure, et al.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for the Cures on the Neals’ claims of environmental contamination under the Environmental Legal Act, nuisance, trespass, and negligence. The designated evidence does not, in light of the Cures' lack of involvement in or knowledge of Masterwear’s actions, give rise to a genuine issue of material fact regarding the Cures' liability for nuisance, trespass, negligence, or an ELA violation.

Estate of Doris P. Jackson, John Cox, et al. v. George R. Jackson, II, et al.
Estate. Affirms order that objectors to a sale of property, who are beneficiaries of the land, post a $100,000 cash bond. Concludes the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion by ordering a cash bond simply because it might pose a hardship and be more expensive than another form of surety.

Allied Property and Casualty Ins. v. Linda Good and Randall Good
Civil. Reverses denial of Allied’s motion for summary judgment because misrepresentations on the application for insurance made Linda Good’s policy void ab initio. Because the uncontradicted evidence indicates Linda misrepresented the Goods’ cancellation history on the application for homeowners insurance and Allied would not have issued the policy if it had known the truth about their history, the trial court erred by denying Allied’s motion for summary judgment.

Bradley Peaver v. State of Indiana
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief. Peaver can’t prevail on his ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim. He waived the issue on appeal as to whether the trial court abused its discretion when it admitted testimony under the Protected Person Statute and there is sufficient evidence to support his conviction of Class C felony child exploitation.

St. Joseph Hospital v. Richard Cain
Civil plenary. Reverses grant of Fort Wayne Metropolitan Human Rights Commission’s motion to dismiss St. Joseph’s petition for judicial review of the HRC’s decision for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction over St. Joseph’s unverified petition for judicial review, it improperly granted the HRC’s motion to dismiss and declined to rule on the other outstanding motions, namely St. Joseph’s motion to amend. The alleged lack of a quorum, however, was not properly raised in St. Joseph’s motion to dismiss. Remands for consideration of St. Joseph’s motion to amend.

City of Indianapolis, Metropolitan Development Commission and Indiana Sports Corporation v. Clarke Kahlo and Howard Elder, et al.
Civil. Affirms the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on the issue of whether Kahlo and Elder have standing, although on different reasoning, and reverses the denial of summary judgment on the issues of the nature of the 1985 Agreement, the applicability of Indiana Code Section 36-1-11-3, and whether the execution of the Amendment triggered the buyout provision in the restrictive covenant of the 1985 Agreement. Remands with instructions for the trial court to enter summary judgment for the City of Indianapolis and other defendants accordingly.

John P. Donovan v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony auto theft because there is sufficient evidence to support the conviction.

J.B. & J.G. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms adjudications for committing what would be child molesting as Class C felonies if committed by an adult.

Christopher Brinker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

M.N. v. A.N. (NFP)
Domestic relation. Affirms order dissolving the parties’ marriage.

Tyrone A. Saunders v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Latrina Strader v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Roger Sloan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony battery and being a habitual offender.

J.D.S. v. Review Board (NFP)
Civil. Affirms decision of the Review Board in favor M.H. on claims for unemployment benefits.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of J.J.; V.B. and K.J. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parent-child relationship.

MacLellan Integrated Services, Inc.v. Domineck P. Marano, II (NFP)

Civil tort. Affirms denial of MacLellan’s motion for summary judgment in Marano’s negligence action against the company.

Robert Perry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of M.Y., et al.; R.W.-S. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Tonya Peete v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues