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

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. 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."

ADVERTISEMENT