ILNews

Opinions Oct. 21, 2010

October 21, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Brenda Moore v. State of Indiana
49A04-1001-CR-46
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication. Under the circumstances, Moore was not in a public place and therefore the evidence is insufficient to support a conviction of public intoxication. Judge Vaidik dissents.

Kelly A. Fisher v. Estate of Robert Fisher, et al.
48A02-1002-EU-197
Estate. Reverses judgment in favor of the personal representatives of the Estate of Robert Fisher. The refund of the premium paid for an annuity, which Robert Fisher purchased in the name of the family limited partnership and later re-titled in his name, is the property of the family limited partnership. Orders the annuity premium refund to be deposited with the Fisher Family Limited Partnership.

Hamrick's Diesel Service & Trailer Repair, LLC v. City of Evansville, by and through its Board of Public Works
82A01-1003-PL-109
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for the City of Evansville and dismissal of Hamrick’s case. Since Hamrick had no right to have its bid considered it cannot sustain a legal claim to have been deprived of a contractual right for which it is entitled to damages from the city.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of K.G.; A.G. v. Allen County D.C.S. (NFP)

02A03-1003-JT-341
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

William Howard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1002-CR-201
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony burglary.

Gary Parsons v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A04-1003-PC-196
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Joseph C. Bannon v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A05-1001-CR-120
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony attempted obstruction of justice and Class C felony reckless homicide.

Douglas Griffith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-CR-342
Criminal. Affirms convictions of domestic battery as a Class D felony and battery as a Class A misdemeanor.

Kristina Byers-Escobedo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1003-CR-208
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class A felony neglect of a dependent.

Stacy Price v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1004-CR-366
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

J.H. v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1005-EX-607
Civil. Affirms the dismissal of J.H.’s appeal before the Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development.

James Merket v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-CR-331
Criminal. Dismisses appeal of conviction of impersonation of a public servant as a Class D felony since Merket is now deceased.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  2. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  3. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  4. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  5. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

ADVERTISEMENT