ILNews

Opinions Nov. 8, 2012

November 8, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jerome Michael Burton v. State of Indiana
45A03-1201-CR-6
Criminal. Reverses denial of motion to dismiss the charge of failure to register as a sex offender. Remands with instructions. Wallace applies and the ex post facto provision of the Indiana Constitution prevents the application of Indiana’s Sex Offender Registry Act to require Burton, a resident of Indiana, to register as a sex offender for an offense committed in Illinois in 1987.

Jeff Clade v. Hunt Construction Group, Inc. (NFP)
49A02-1206-CT-509
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Hunt Construction Group on Clade’s negligence claim and remands with instructions.

T.B. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and A.R. (NFP)
93A02-1112-EX-1143
Agency appeal. Affirms denial of request to reinstate appeal.
 
Clay R. Firestone v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1201-PC-32
Post conviction. Grants petition for rehearing and reaffirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Troy Phillips v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1203-PC-152
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

F.M., Mother v. N.B., Father (NFP)
71A05-1206-JP-291
Juvenile. Reverses denial of motion to continue. Remands for a new hearing.

Brian E. Graves v. State of Indiana (NFP)
16A01-1205-CR-227
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony escape.

Jason Bond, David Lear and Leslie Bridges, et al. v. Veolia Water Indianapolis, LLC, Veolia Water North America Operating Service, LLC and The City of Indianapolis, Dept. of Waterworks (NFP)
49A02-1202-CC-147
Civil collection. Affirms dismissal of case for unjust enrichment, breach of contract and violation of the Deceptive Consumer Sales Act for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Zachary A. Sebastian v. State of Indiana (NFP)
52A02-1205-CR-372
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felonies reckless homicide and carrying a handgun without a license.

The City of Shelbyville, Indiana and Shelbyville Board of Works and Safety v. Frank P. and Shirlene Sundvall (NFP)
73A01-1203-PL-98
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of the city’s motion for summary judgment in an action initiated by the Sundvalls. Remands for further proceedings.

No Indiana opinions were released by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals prior to IL deadline. The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court released no opinions prior to IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT