ILNews

Opinions Oct. 17, 2013

October 17, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Wednesday.
Orbitz, LLC v. Indiana Department of State Revenue
49T10-0903-TA-10
Tax. Grants Orbitz’s request to have certain documents, including contracts with Indiana hotels, placed under seal. The contracts have the four characteristics of trade secrets, so they fall within the mandatory exceptions to the general rule of public access set forth in the Access to Public Records Act and Administrative Rule 9.

Thursday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

Timothy L. Hyser v. State of Indiana
20A05-1301-CR-37
Criminal. Reverses convictions of Class A felony and Class C felony child molesting. The exclusion of the evidence Hyser wished to present deprived him of a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense. The state is not barred from retrying Hyser.

North American Roofing Services, Inc. v. Menard, Inc.
26A01-1303-PL-125
Civil plenary. Reverses grant of summary judgment to Menard and denial of partial summary judgment to North American Roofing Services on its lawsuit after Menard refused to pay for installation of a new roof. Remands with instructions to deny Menard’s motion for summary judgment on NARSI’s claims for breach of contract and foreclosure of mechanic’s lien; grant NARSI’s motion for partial summary judgment on its claim for breach of contract; and move forward to resolve NARSI’s claim to foreclose upon mechanic’s lien.

Anthony Worl v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1302-CR-167
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony child molesting, Class D felony child solicitation and three counts of Class C felony child molesting, as well as a habitual offender determination.

Antonio Hughley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1301-CR-40
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class D felony dealing in marijuana.

William J. Eisele v. State of Indiana (NFP)
51A01-1304-PC-154
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Darren Englert v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1302-CR-88
Criminal. Vacates convictions of Class A felony conspiracy to commit murder, Class D felony criminal confinement and Class C felony conspiracy to commit battery. Affirms convictions of Class B felony conspiracy to commit criminal confinement, Class C felony battery and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana and affirms 80-year sentence.

Jeffery Bonds v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1301-CR-11
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony invasion of privacy.

Darrail Mix v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1304-CR-314
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies domestic battery and battery and Class A misdemeanors domestic battery and resisting law enforcement.

Frances Ashton v. City of Indianapolis (NFP)
49A02-1210-MI-815
Miscellaneous. Affirms judgment affirming the decision of the merit board of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department to terminate Ashton’s employment as a police officer.

Harold Ferrin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1210-PC-839
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Justin Dent v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A03-1304-CR-128
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony operating a vehicle as a habitual traffic violator.

Norman T. Podell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1302-CR-64
Criminal. Affirms two convictions of Class D felony pointing a firearm.

David Davenport v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1210-CR-842
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class B felony dealing in cocaine and conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. Remands for the trial court to impose a sentence on the misdemeanor conviction that comports with I.C. 35-50-3-2.

Miguel Perez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1304-CR-288
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony identity deception.

Bush Truck Leasing, Inc., v. Indiana Farmers Mutual Insurance Company (NFP)
49A05-1304-CT-189
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for Indiana Farmers on Bush Truck Leasing’s complaint for declaratory judgment and damages.

FSF Presidential Estates, Associates, LLC, individually and d/b/a Presidential Estates Apartments and Indianapolis Power and Light v. Joshua Grounds, Fleener Roofing & Guttering, LLC (NFP)
49A05-1305-CT-209
Civil tort. Affirms denial of IPL’s motion for summary judgment and Grounds’ motion for partial summary judgment in Grounds’ suit filed to recover damages after he was electrocuted.

Devon Miller v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1303-CR-286
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Stanley D. Wills v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1210-CR-834
Criminal. Vacates Wills’ conviction for Class C felony theft as a lesser included offense of robbery and remands for further proceedings. Affirms convictions of Class B felony aiding in the commission of armed robbery, Class B felony conspiracy to commit armed robbery, and Class B felony criminal confinement, as well as finding Wills is a habitual offender.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no decisions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT