ILNews

Opinions Nov. 24, 2010

November 24, 2010
Keywords
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.
49A04-0908-CV-468
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.
77A04-1005-ES-331
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
85A04-0905-CV-240
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
02A03-1004-PC-255
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
02A05-1006-PL-386
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.
49A05-0912-CV-722
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
71A05-1003-CR-276
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)
18A02-1006-JV-679
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)
33A04-1007-CR-433
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

M.N. v. A.N. (NFP)
49A02-1002-DR-152
Domestic relation. Affirms order dissolving the parties’ marriage.

Tyrone A. Saunders v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A05-0910-PC-607
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Latrina Strader v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1004-CR-235
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Roger Sloan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1002-CR-195
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony battery and being a habitual offender.

J.D.S. v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1006-EX-698
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)
20A04-1004-JT-226
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parent-child relationship.

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

26A01-1006-CT-296
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)
71A03-1004-PC-266
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)
45A04-1001-JT-217
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Tonya Peete v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1004-CR-220
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

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. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. "...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.

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

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT