ILNews

Opinions Nov. 30, 2010

November 30, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Monday.
Indiana Tax Court
Hubler Realty Company v. Hendricks County Assessor
49T10-1001-TA-5
Tax. Affirms Indiana Board of Tax Review’s upholding of the Hendricks County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals’ assessment of Hubler’s commercial properties for the 2006 tax year. The assessor’s testimony doesn’t suggest that her assessments or her determination as to the propriety thereof were the products of sales chasing, spot assessments, or selective reappraisals. The PTABOA’s consideration of Hubler’s sales disclosure form doesn’t mean that it engaged in sales chasing or selectively reappraised Hubler’s properties.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted
no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Albert J. Hall v. State of Indiana
06A05-1003-CR-187
Criminal. Reverses conviction of operating a motor vehicle as a habitual traffic offender as a Class D felony. The trial court committed fundamental error in its instruction on the mens rea element of the Habitual Traffic Violator Statute. Remands for a new trial.

MH Equity Managing Member, LLC v. Debra K. Sands
49A02-1005-CC-495
Civil collections. Affirms order enforcing a settlement agreement between MH Equity Managing Member and Sands providing for dismissal with prejudice of a complaint alleging that Sands had breached a fiduciary duty in performing services for MH Private Equity Fund. The parties entered into a binding contract which required the subsequent execution of a document memorializing their agreement and there is no uncertainty as to any substantial term of the settlement contract.

Anastacio Carrera v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-CR-238
Criminal. Affirms convictions of child molesting as Class A and Class B felonies, and sexual misconduct with a minor as Class B and Class C felonies.

Involuntary Commitment of B.K. (NFP)
33A01-1006-MH-301
Mental health. Affirms commitment at Logansport State Hospital.

Kevin Ware v. State of Indiana (NFP)
69A01-1004-PC-204
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Justin Robinette v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1004-CR-501
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to three counts of Class B sexual misconduct with a minor, and one count of Class C felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Maria Chavarria v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1007-CR-381
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to dealing in cocaine weighing over three grams, a Class A felony.

E.H., Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; J.H. v. Marion County D.C.S. (NFP)
49A02-1004-JC-539
Juvenile. Affirms determination that E.H. is a child in need of services.

Brandon Phillips v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1004-CR-267
Criminal. Affirms sentence for murder and Class B felony criminal confinement resulting in serious bodily injury.

D.S. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1004-JV-484
Juvenile. Affirms adjudications for committing what would be Class B felony burglary and Class D felony theft if committed by an adult, and that the trial court disposition is appropriate.

In the Matter of the Adoption of E.L.; J.N. v. R.J. (NFP)
49A02-1005-AD-569
Adoption. Affirms denial of the stepfather’s petition to adopt his wife’s daughter.

L.S. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development (NFP)
93A02-0911-EX-1057
Civil. Affirms decision that L.S. is disqualified from eligibility for unemployment benefits because he was dismissed for just cause.

Kieno Austin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1007-CR-820
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Town v. Review Board and B.K. (NFP)
93A02-1002-EX-146
Civil. Affirms grant of B.K.’s application for unemployment benefits.

Vera D. Alsadi v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1004-CR-561
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony theft.

Mary E. McKinney v. Windy Lane Farms, Inc., et al. (NFP)
08A02-1001-CC-71
Civil collections. Reverses dismissal of McKinney’s third-party complaint and the grant of summary judgment in favor of third-party defendants Windy Lane Farms and others. Remands for further proceedings.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of N.S., et al.; D.S. v. Bartholomew County D.C.S. (NFP)
03A01-1005-JT-222
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Anthony B. Rias, II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1004-CR-182
Criminal. Affirms conviction of felony murder.

DeWayne V. Adamson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
53A01-1002-CR-88
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and the finding Adamson is a habitual offender.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court denied transfer to five cases for the week ending Nov. 24.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Some are above the law in Indiana. Some lined up with Lodges have controlled power in the state since the 1920s when the Klan ruled Indiana. Consider the comments at this post and note the international h.q. in Indianapolis. http://www.theindianalawyer.com/human-trafficking-rising-in-indiana/PARAMS/article/42468. Brave journalists need to take this child torturing, above the law and antimarriage cult on just like The Globe courageously took on Cardinal Law. Are there any brave Hoosier journalists?

  2. I am nearing 66 years old..... I have no interest in contacting anyone. All I need to have is a nationality....a REAL Birthday...... the place U was born...... my soul will never be at peace. I have lived my life without identity.... if anyone can help me please contact me.

  3. This is the dissent discussed in the comment below. See comments on that story for an amazing discussion of likely judicial corruption of some kind, the rejection of the rule of law at the very least. http://www.theindianalawyer.com/justices-deny-transfer-to-child-custody-case/PARAMS/article/42774#comment

  4. That means much to me, thank you. My own communion, to which I came in my 30's from a protestant evangelical background, refuses to so affirm me, the Bishop's courtiers all saying, when it matters, that they defer to the state, and trust that the state would not be wrong as to me. (LIttle did I know that is the most common modernist catholic position on the state -- at least when the state acts consistent with the philosophy of the democrat party). I asked my RCC pastor to stand with me before the Examiners after they demanded that I disavow God's law on the record .... he refused, saying the Bishop would not allow it. I filed all of my file in the open in federal court so the Bishop's men could see what had been done ... they refused to look. (But the 7th Cir and federal judge Theresa Springmann gave me the honor of admission after so reading, even though ISC had denied me, rendering me a very rare bird). Such affirmation from a fellow believer as you have done here has been rare for me, and that dearth of solidarity, and the economic pain visited upon my wife and five children, have been the hardest part of the struggle. They did indeed banish me, for life, and so, in substance did the the Diocese, which treated me like a pariah, but thanks to this ezine ... and this is simply amazing to me .... because of this ezine I am not silenced. This ezine allowing us to speak to the corruption that the former chief "justice" left behind, yet embedded in his systems when he retired ... the openness to discuss that corruption (like that revealed in the recent whistleblowing dissent by courageous Justice David and fresh breath of air Chief Justice Rush,) is a great example of the First Amendment at work. I will not be silenced as long as this tree falling in the wood can be heard. The Hoosier Judiciary has deep seated problems, generational corruption, ideological corruption. Many cases demonstrate this. It must be spotlighted. The corrupted system has no hold on me now, none. I have survived their best shots. It is now my time to not be silent. To the Glory of God, and for the good of man's law. (It almost always works that way as to the true law, as I explained the bar examiners -- who refused to follow even their own statutory law and violated core organic law when banishing me for life -- actually revealing themselves to be lawless.)

  5. to answer your questions, you would still be practicing law and its very sad because we need lawyers like you to stand up for the little guy who have no voice. You probably were a threat to them and they didnt know how to handle the truth and did not want anyone to "rock the boat" so instead of allowing you to keep praticing they banished you, silenced you , the cowards that they are.

ADVERTISEMENT