ILNews

Opinions Oct. 26, 2012

October 26, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court released no opinions by IL deadline Friday.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals released no Indiana opinions by IL deadline Friday.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re the Involuntary Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of A.P.: T.P. v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services and Child Advocates, Inc. (NFP)
49A02-1201-JT-28
Juvenile termination of parental rights. Affirms termination of father’s parental rights.

Dennis Adkins v. Judy Saunders, Individually and d/b/a Prevention and More Herbs (NFP)
68A04-1203-CT-103
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s grant of summary judgment and award of attorney fees in favor of Saunders and the business on Adkins’ negligence claim.

Matt D. Niblick v. State of Indiana (NFP)
90A04-1203-CR-132
Criminal. Affirms sentence for one count of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

Melissa Krodel v. Douglas Krodel (NFP)
55A01-1201-DR-34
Domestic relation. Affirms award of physical and legal custody of minor children to father.

V.R. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1204-JS-187
Juvenile. Affirms evidence was sufficient to support V.R.’s delinquency adjudication for truancy.

Zane Ziebell v. South Milford Grain Company (NFP)
57A03-1203-CC-89
Civil collection. Affirms denial of Ziebell’s motion for relief from summary judgment in favor of South Milford Grain Co. on its complaint against Ziebell for $15,000 in damages.

Gilbert Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1204-CR-254
Criminal. Affirms conviction of two counts of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Charles Chulchian v. Rivoli Center for the Performing Arts, Inc., and Indianapolis Eastside Revitalization Corp. (NFP)
49A02-1205-PL-435
Civil Plenary. Dismisses interlocutory appeal of the denial of Chulchian’s verified motion to reconsider or motion to correct errors.

Nyunt Shew v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1203-CR-134
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony aggravated battery.
 

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. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT