ILNews

Opinions Oct. 10, 2012

October 10, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Charles R. Kastner v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
11-1166
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann Jr.
Civil. Reverses denial of disability benefits, finding the administrative law judge did not adequately explain why Kastner had not met the requirements for a presumptive disability. Remands for further proceedings.

Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

In the Matter of G.W. (Minor Child); A.W. (Mother) and J.W. (Stepfather) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services
07A01-1201-JM-6
Juvenile miscellaneous. Finds a trial court may order a parent to make a child available for an interview requested by the Department of Child Services to assess the child’s “condition” pursuant to I.C. 31-33-8-7, where the child’s older sibling has made and then recanted allegations of sexual abuse against a family member who lives in the children’s home. Judge Riley dissents.

Tim L. Godby v. State of Indiana
33A01-1203-CR-128
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence. Godby’s belated attempt to correct the error related to costs through the motion to correct erroneous sentence is not proper.

In Re: The Matter of the Paternity of B.G., Minor Child; C.G. (Mother) v. R.M. (Father) (NFP)
77A01-1202-JP-82
Juvenile paternity. Reverses judgment allowing change of B.G.’s name and remands for a determination of best interest as it pertains to B.G.’s last name. Orders trial court to make the weekly child support order retroactive to at least the date that the mother filed the paternity action. Affirms giving the father a parenting time credit of $5.76 per week.

Judson D. Garrett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1205-CR-231
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony robbery.

Charles Musselwhite v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1202-PC-136
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Edward Cecil, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
22A04-1112-CR-689
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony dealing in cocaine or a narcotic drug.

Grandview Memorial Gardens, LLC, Keith Mefford, Brittan Mefford, Richard Eblen and Sherry Eblen v. John C. Eckert, Wilmer E. Goering, II, and Alcorn Goering & Sage, LLP (NFP)
49A02-1111-PL-992
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of summary judgment to Eckert and reverses it as to Goering and AGS. The statute of limitations does not bar the Grandview clients’ claims against Goering and AGS for negligently handling the fire insurance claim and there is a dispute of material fact as to whether the Grandview clients and Goering and AGS had an attorney-client relationship with respect to that matter. Remands for further proceedings.

Zachary Podorsky v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A05-1202-CR-94
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Douglas A. Myers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1202-CR-78
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Paris Knox v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1203-CR-214
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

 

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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT