ILNews

Opinions Nov. 5, 2010

November 5, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
S.A. v. Review Board
93A02-1004-EX-568
Civil. Affirms the Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development’s ruling that S.A.’s acceptance of an early retirement package made her ineligible to continue receiving unemployment benefits. S.A. left employment without good cause in connection with the work.

Deana Crickmore v. John R. Crickmore (NFP)
49A04-1003-DR-184
Domestic relation. Affirms finding John’s overpayments of spousal maintenance were involuntary and the order Deana repay him accordingly. Reverses amount of judgment as to the dollar amount and affirms in all other respects. Remands for further proceedings.

Robin L. Rashin v. Mark W. Rashin (NFP)
45A04-0911-CV-660
Civil. Reverses denial of rehabilitative maintenance to Robin and remands with instructions to calculate an award of rehabilitative maintenance, to exclude the settlement proceeds from the marital estate, and to recalculate the division of marital property accordingly. Remands the issue of whether Robin shall be awarded appellate attorney fees. Affirms judgment in all other respects.

Jeanette Daniels, et al. v. Hidden Bay Homeowners Association, Inc., et al. (NFP)
49A02-1003-PL-279
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for all of the defendants in Daniels and Russell’s suit to recover damage to a condominium and personal property after a fire.

In the Guardianship of Z.E. and A.W.; Ala.G., et al. v. Alk.G., et al. (NFP)

45A05-1004-GU-255
Guardianship. Affirms juvenile court has subject matter jurisdiction over the grandparents’ custody action as it relates to one of the children and remands for a determination of whether the court has subject matter as it relates to the other child. Affirms order finding the mother is the custodian of the children unless another court has ruled otherwise and by appointment a guardian ad litem and directing the grandparents to pay a portion of the guardian ad litem’s fees relating to Z.E. Reverses order appointing GAL and requiring grandparents to pay GAL fees for matters relating to A.W. only if the court is found to lack jurisdiction over the custody of A.W. on remand.  

Antonio M. Sanders v. State of Indiana (NFP)

22A01-1005-CR-234
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. @BryanJBrown, You are totally correct. I have no words, you nailed it.....

  2. You have not overstated the reality of the present situation. The government inquisitor in my case, who demanded that I, on the record, to choose between obedience to God's law or man's law, remains on the BLE, even an officer of the BLE, and was recently renewed in her contract for another four years. She has a long history in advancing LGBQT rights. http://www.realjock.com/article/1071 THINK WITH ME: What if a currently serving BLE officer or analogous court official (ie discplinary officer) asked an atheist to affirm the Existence, or demanded a transsexual to undergo a mental evaluation to probe his/her alleged mindcrime? That would end a career. The double standard is glaring, see the troubling question used to ban me for life from the Ind bar right here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners (see page 8 of 21) Again, what if I had been a homosexual rights activist before law school rather than a prolife activist? A gay rights activist after law school admitted to the SCOTUS and Kansas since 1996, without discipline? A homosexual rights activist who had argued before half the federal appellate courts in the country? I am pretty certain that had I been that LGBQT activist, and not a pro-life activist, my passing of the Indiana bar exam would have rendered me an Indiana attorney .... rather than forever banished. So yes, there is a glaring double standard. And some are even beyond the reach of constitutional and statutory protections. I was.

  3. Historically speaking pagans devalue children and worship animals. How close are we? Consider the ruling above plus today's tidbit from the politically correct high Court: http://indianacourts.us/times/2016/12/are-you-asking-the-right-questions-intimate-partner-violence-and-pet-abuse/

  4. The father is a convicted of spousal abuse. 2 restaining orders been put on him, never made any difference the whole time she was there. The time he choked the mother she dropped the baby the police were called. That was the only time he was taken away. The mother was suppose to have been notified when he was released no call was ever made. He made his way back, kicked the door open and terrified the mother. She ran down the hallway and locked herself and the baby in the bathroom called 911. The police came and said there was nothing they could do (the policeman was a old friend from highschool, good ole boy thing).They told her he could burn the place down as long as she wasn't in it.The mother got another resataining order, the judge told her if you were my daughter I would tell you to leave. So she did. He told her "If you ever leave me I will make your life hell, you don't know who your f!@#$%^ with". The fathers other 2 grown children from his 1st exwife havent spoke 1 word to him in almost 15yrs not 1 word.This is what will be a forsure nightmare for this little girl who is in the hands of pillar of the community. Totally corrupt system. Where I come from I would be in jail not only for that but non payment of child support. Unbelievably pitiful...

  5. dsm 5 indicates that a lot of kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it. so is it really a good idea to encourage gender reassignment? Perhaps that should wait for the age of majority. I don't question the compassionate motives of many of the trans-advocates, but I do question their wisdom. Likewise, they should not question the compassion of those whose potty policies differ. too often, any opposition to the official GLBT agenda is instantly denounced as "homophobia" etc.

ADVERTISEMENT