ILNews

Opinions Nov. 4, 2010

November 4, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
DBL Axel LLC v. Lasalle Bank National Association
15A01-1003-PL-205
Civil plenary. Affirms order directing immediate turnover of funds in favor of LaSalle Bank. The checks paid by the city of Lawrenceburg to DBL concerned the property in question and were within the scope of and subject to the receivership order, and DBL’s failure to include that money paid or otherwise notify the receiver of the settlement agreement was a violation of that order. Remands for the trial court to amend its order directing immediate turnover of funds and enter an order directing turnover in the amount of $1,365,500.

Bruce R. Fox v. Dennis Rice and West Central Community Corrections
54A01-1003-PL-97
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of West Central Community Corrections in Fox’s claims of false arrest, false imprisonment, and violation of rights under the Indiana and federal constitutions. The tort claim notice period expired before Fox filed his notice, and his federal claim doesn’t contain a genuine issue of material fact.

In the Matter of the Guardianship of Azzie Justice v. Garnet S. Justice (NFP)
43A03-0912-CV-584
Civil. Affirms appointing Garnet as the guardian of the person and estate of Azzie.

Linda Chiesi v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A05-1003-PC-205
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.J.M.; C.M. v. Lake County DCS (NFP)
45A03-1004-JT-248
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Kenneth Mitan v. Richard E. Deckard Family Limited Partnership #206 (NFP)
53A01-0912-CV-612
Civil. Affirms conclusion that Mitan was a proper party to the partnerships forfeiture action. Reverses award of all personal property and remands with instructions to award to the partnership only that personal property specified by the contract as being included in the sale.

Nickolas Sandifer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1004-CR-186
Criminal. Affirms denial of Sandifer’s unverified, oral motion to withdraw his guilty plea.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.



 

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. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT