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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT