ILNews

Opinions Nov. 29, 2010

November 29, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
American Bank v. City of Menasha, et al.
10-1963
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Civil. Reverses judgment granting a stay requested by Menasha to give American Bank certain records available pursuant to Wisconsin’s Public Records Law. The bank, a plaintiff in a class-action suit charging the city violated federal securities law, requested the documents after the suit was filed. The stay is not a stay of a discovery order and can only be an injunction; only a stay of discovery is authorized by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998.

Louquetta O’Connor-Spinner v. Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
09-4083
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, New Albany Division, Judge David F. Hamilton.
Civil. The administrative law judge’s hypothetical did not supply the vocational expert with information adequate to determine whether O’Connor-Spinner could perform jobs in the national economy. The ALJ also did not address potentially important evidence that she has difficulty taking instructions and responding appropriately to supervisors. Remands for further proceedings.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Donnie Salyer v. State of Indiana
75A05-1003-CR-164
Criminal. Affirms denial of Salyer’s motion to suppress evidence obtained during a search of his residence. The incorrect address information on the warrant did not invalidate it because the executing officer knew the precise location of Salyer’s home, prepared the search warrant and accompanying affidavit, and executed the search warrant.

Walker Whatley v. State of Indiana
49A02-1007-CR-839
Criminal. Affirms dismissal of motion for re-trial under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B). Based upon Whatley’s motion and the dates of his attached documents, he didn’t demonstrate that the alleged newly discovered evidence could not have been discovered by due diligence in time for him to move for a motion to correct error under Rule 59.

S.D. v. State of Indiana
49A02-1004-JV-442
Juvenile. Reverses adjudication for what would be Class C felony child molesting if committed by an adult. The juvenile court erred by admitting S.D.’s confession because he had not been given meaningful consultation with his guardian as required by Indiana’s juvenile waiver of rights statute.

John D. Hemmings v. State of Indiana (NFP)
63A01-1003-CR-162
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

John V. Guthrie, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1003-CR-166
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony child molesting and Class C felony child molesting.

James M. Sampson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-CR-355
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony residential entry.

Rafael A. DeJesus v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1002-CR-95
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Michael Nuckols v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1002-CR-202
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Travis W. Jackson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
33A04-1006-CR-398
Criminal. Dismisses appeal of validity of guilty plea to Class D felony stalking and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Bruce D. Seal v. Lori L. Seal (NFP)
48A04-0912-DR-750
Domestic relation. Affirms awarding attorney’s fees to Lori but reverses awarding a pension plan solely to Lori. Remands for further proceedings.

Paternity of F.B.; P.B. v. J.M. (NFP)
55A04-1006-JP-360
Juvenile. Reverses finding that P.B. was in contempt and remands with instructions to vacate its original order in this regard. Affirms modified support order reducing his support obligation to $54 per week. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in imputing a $400 a week income to the father based on his previous income of $470 a week.

Cody Lewellen and Cody Dallas v. Brandon Cessna (NFP)
80A05-1005-CT-330
Civil tort. Affirms denial of Lewellen’s Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) motion to set aside default judgment in a personal injury action filed by Cessna.

Eric Hall v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1003-CR-244
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT