ILNews

Opinions Oct. 26, 2010

October 26, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Allstate Insurance Company v. Timothy Clancy, et al.
45A03-0910-CV-498
Civil. Reverses trial court’s order granting a motion to compel the production of documents. In its interlocutory appeal, Allstate Insurance Company raised the following issue: whether the trial court abused its discretion by compelling production of documents subject to the attorney-client privilege on the ground that Allstate has implicitly raised an advice of counsel defense, thereby waiving the attorney-client privilege.

Nathan Brock v. State of Indiana
38A02-1003-CR-272
Criminal. Affirms Nathan Brock’s conviction of operating a motor vehicle after forfeiture of license for life, a Class C felony. Brock argued his convictions violated double jeopardy because the trial court granted the state’s request for a mistrial at the close of the first trial in the absence of a manifest necessity to do so, and then permitted the state to retry Brock, resulting in his conviction. Indiana Court of Appeals found the mistrial and subsequent retrial did not violate double jeopardy.

Troy Burge v. State of Indiana (NFP)
56A03-1006-CR-331
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion for credit time and time served.

Russell Timmons v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A05-0910-CR-567
Criminal. Affirms conviction of confinement, a Class C felony.

Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of C.O.V.; C.L.V. and T.G. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1003-JT-445
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

O.P. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development (NFP)
93A02-1003-EX-408
Civil. Affirms Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development’s denial of request for unemployment benefits.

The Law Offices of Wayne Greeson, PC, and Shammah Investments, LLC v. Steuben County Auditor (NFP)
76A03-1003-MI-122
Civil. Affirms trial court’s judgment in favor of Steuben County Auditor regarding attorney fees in tax sales.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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