ILNews

Opinions Nov. 29, 2012

November 29, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Terry and Laura Wagler, Larry and Jennifer Wagler, Norman Wagler, and Janet and Nathan Wagler v. West Boggs Sewer District Inc.
14A01-1109-PL-427
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of the Waglers’ motions for relief from judgment pursuant to Ind. Trial Rule 60(B), and that the court did not err in directing Janet and Nathan Wagler to connect to the sewer system. Denies West Boggs’ request for appellate attorney fees.

Miles Ogea d/b/a Mo Auger Investments and Mo's Tavern v. Karamesines Credit Shelter Trust (NFP)
18A04-1206-CT-288
Civil tort. Affirms ruling that Ogea has a duty to indemnify the second trust pursuant to the lease agreement between Ogea and the trust.

H. Wayne Burnett, M.D. v. Pamela A. Burnett, M.D. (NFP)
29A02-1203-DR-180
Domestic relation. Affirms valuation of Dr. H. Wayne Burnett’s partnership interest in a medical practice and the award of expert witness fees to Dr. Pamela A. Burnett. Affirms unequal division of the marital estate.

Richard A. Childress, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

45A03-1206-PC-246
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel.of: M.M. (Minor Child), and S.H. (Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
85A02-1204-JT-323
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Corbin Bardonner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1205-CR-231
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class A felony child molesting.

Jamey Taskey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
67A01-1204-CR-164
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony neglect of a dependent.

David S. Healey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
33A04-1202-MI-107
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of verified petition to remove designation as offender.

Vickie Fenoglio, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Paul Fenoglio, Deceased v. Gregory Brock, D.O. (NFP)
84A04-1202-PL-59
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for Dr. Gregory Brock.

Timothy J. Gilbert v. State of Indiana (NFP)
62A01-1205-PC-213
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. I totally agree with John Smith.

  5. An idea that would harm the public good which is protected by licensing. Might as well abolish doctor and health care professions licensing too. Ridiculous. Unrealistic. Would open the floodgates of mischief and abuse. Even veteranarians are licensed. How has deregulation served the public good in banking, for example? Enough ideology already!

ADVERTISEMENT