7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Rick Gillespie, Dawn Gillespie and Rick's Towing and Maintenance, LLC v. Frank B. Niles and Kathryn
Niles
49A05-1102-CT-70
Civil tort. Affirms denial of the Gillespies’ objection to the Nileses’ request for a pre-trial conference and
refusal to dismiss the action under Indiana Trial Rule 41(E). Affirms grant of summary judgment for the Niles and denial of
summary judgment for the Gillespies. The Gillespies failed to wait the required 15 days before selling Kathryn’s vehicle
at auction. The trial court erred by granting summary judgment against the Gillespies individually as the judgment should
be against Rick’s Towing only.
R.R.F. v. L.L.F.
69A01-1102-DR-70
Domestic relation. Affirms order on remand apportioning post-secondary educational expenses for the parties’ son between
father and mother. The appellate court has subject matter jurisdiction because the order on remand is an appealable final
judgment and the dissolution court’s allocation of the benefits of the tax credits as a result of the son’s enrollment
in college was not clearly erroneous.
M.L. v. Meridian Services, Inc.
18A02-1103-MH-233
Mental health. Affirms M.L.’s temporary commitment to a state-operated facility for a 90-day period because there is
clear and convincing evidence he was dangerous. Reverses the authorization to administer medication because there is insufficient
evidence to support it.
Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of E.P. (Minor child) and A.P. and J.P. (Parents); A.P. (Mother) v. Indiana
Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
47A01-1101-JT-38
Juvenile. Affirms termination of mother’s parental rights.
Terry Laderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1103-CR-221
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony burglary and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without
a license.
Farrell Haycraft v. State of Indiana (NFP)
31A01-1009-PC-525
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
James Traylor v. Beth Traylor (NFP)
29A02-1102-DR-247
Domestic relation. Affirms finding James Traylor was in contempt and the stayed $6,500 portion of the fine and the attorney
fee award were proper sanctions. Reverses first $6,500 portion of the fine because it was improper. Remands for that portion
to be vacated.
Weida Levee, LLC v. Doug Brooks and Regina Brooks (NFP)
79A05-1012-CT-739
Civil tort. Affirms order in favor of the Brookses in a case involving a lease of commercial space.
Blease White, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1101-PC-16
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
Buzz Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
52A05-1104-PC-183
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.
Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.