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

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