ILNews

Opinions Oct. 22, 2013

October 22, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Billy Julian v. Sam Hanna, et. al.
1:11-CV-01536
Criminal. Reverses District Court grant of summary judgment to defendant parties in a malicious prosecution case and remands for further proceedings, holding that Billy Julian’s claim was improperly dismissed as untimely. The panel held that the two-year window for the claim did not begin until November 2010, when charges against him were dismissed, and therefore filing of the claim in July 2011 was timely.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Allen County Public Library v. Shambaugh & Son, L.P., Hamilton Hunter Builders, Inc., W.A. Sheets & Sons, Inc., and MSKTD & Associates, Inc.
02A04-1302-PL-78
Civil plenary. Reverses a trial court grant of summary judgment in favor of Shambaugh & Son and other defendants and remands for further proceedings. The court concluded that a subrogation agreement in a contract for renovations of the main library branch in Fort Wayne does not preclude the library from seeking to recover pollution cleanup costs related to a diesel spill on neighboring properties that the library argues was caused by a contractor rupturing a basement fuel line connected to a generator.

Jeffrey Robinson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1301-CR-6
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to suppress a search of Jeffrey Robinson’s underwear that turned up marijuana.

Tony Kimble v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1303-CR-268
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Gabriel McCreary v. Connersville Storage and Miniwarehousing (NFP)
21A01-1212-CC-554
Collections. Affirms trial court award of damages and attorney fees to Gabriel McCreary.

James W. Johnston v. Diana Johnston (NFP)
49A02-1302-DR-142
Domestic relations. Affirms trial court rulings concerning child support and various rulings leading to the court’s conclusions.

Brian K. Moore v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1301-CR-40
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court issued no opinions prior to 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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT