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. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT