ILNews

Opinions Oct. 13, 2011

October 13, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
George Michael True v. State of Indiana
39A04-1102-CR-37
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery. There was no serious evidentiary dispute about whether the battery was committed in the presence of the children. Instructing the jury that it could convict True of a Class A misdemeanor domestic battery instead of as a Class D felony improperly invited the jury to reach a “compromise” verdict. Remands for proceedings consistent with the opinion.

LeChann Davis v. State of Indiana
49A02-1103-CR-184
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony child molesting. Any abuse of discretion to allow E.S.’s mother’s testimony that E.S. told her that Davis pinched his bottom during Davis’ bench trial was harmless. There is sufficient evidence to support the conviction.

Holiday Hospitality Franchising Inc. v. AMCO Insurance Company
33A01-1103-CT-104
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment for AMCO Insurance Co. in a suit for negligent hiring, retention and/or supervision. The alleged negligent acts give rise to an “occurrence” under the circumstances of the case and a genuine question of material fact remains regarding whether R.M.H. was in the hotel’s “care, custody or control.” Remands for further proceedings.

Jeffrey D. Lacher, et al. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Bemis Co., Inc.
93A02-1102-EX-163
Agency appeal. Affirms denial of employees’ claims for unemployment benefits. The evidence does not support an inference that the employees were locked out of work; it supports the conclusion that an impasse had been reached on the issue of the temporary employee clause.

William Anderson v. Alicia Jones (NFP)
29A02-1104-DR-311
Domestic relation. Affirms order apportioning educational expenses for the couple’s eldest daughter and uninsured medical expenses for the couple’s youngest child.

Stacy A. Jenkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
63A01-1102-CR-050
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and order Jenkins serve the balance of his sentence in the Department of Correction.

Jamar Alston v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1103-PC-307
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

In Re: The Marriage of William Scott Mitchell v. Crystal Hope Bailey (NFP)
88A01-1102-DR-72
Domestic relation. Affirms distribution of property and remands for clarification.

Associated Estates Realty Corporation v. Angela Mason (NFP)
49A02-1105-CT-426
Civil tort. Reverses denial of Associated Estates Realty Corp.’s motion for relief from a default judgment and remands for further proceedings.

D.L. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1101-JV-109
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent juvenile for committing what would be burglary and theft if committed by an adult.

In Re: The Paternity of K.K.A. v. D.J.K. (NFP)
82A01-1103-JP-94
Juvenile. Reverses grant of petition for name change filed by father D.J.K. regarding child K.K.A.

Philip Walker, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1101-CR-112
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery and Class D felony cocaine possession.

Metro Health Professionals Inc. v. Carmel Chrysler Jeep Dodge, Inc., d/b/a Champion Chrysler Jeep Dodge (NFP)
06A01-1105-CT-214
Civil tort. Affirms order awarding Metro Health Professionals $3,500 in attorney fees instead of the $37,737.50 that it requested.

Bruce A. White, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1101-CR-28
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and 65-year sentence for murder.

Cindi M. Hrovat v. Thomas W. Kirchner (NFP)
84A01-1102-DR-31
Domestic relation. Affirms order denying Hrovat’s verified notice of intent to relocate.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT