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. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT