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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT