Opinions Oct. 29, 2010

October 29, 2010
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Thursday.
Indiana Tax Court
Dale J. Scopelite and James T. Sheehan v. Indiana Dept. of Local Government Finance (NFP)
Tax. Affirms the Department of Local Government Finance’s final determination approving the City of Hammond’s budget and tax levy for the 2008 tax year.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
John Taele and Sarah Taele v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment in favor of State Farm. The Taeles aren’t entitled to recover uninsured motorist benefits under their State Farm policy because they themselves were neither directly impacted nor directly physically injured by the accident that killed their daughter. Judge Crone dissents.

J.M. v. D.A.
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of father’s petition to modify child support. The trial court did not err by imputing potential earnings in father’s weekly gross income for purposes of calculating his support obligation after he became a full-time student. Reverses finding father in contempt because the trial court did not find that father has the financial ability to comply. Judge Bradford concurs in part, dissents in part.

Sean H. Chiszar v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class D felony voyeurism, three counts of Class D felony possession of child pornography, Class A misdemeanors possession of paraphernalia, possession of marijuana, and battery. Chiszar didn’t show the voyeurism statute is unconstitutionally vague; the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion when it admitted evidence deputies obtained after Chiszar had consented to the search of his garage; and there was sufficient evidence to support the search warrant.

Douglas Denzell v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms denial of Denzell’s motion to dismiss criminal charges of Class A misdeneaor resisting law enforcement and Class B misdemeanor public intoxication. Denzell does not satisfy the test in Davis and Habibzadah to show a due process violation because there remains the possibility that he will be restored to competency, even though he cannot be sentenced to an additional term if convicted.  

Y.G. v. Review Board
Civil. Affirms denial of unemployment benefits. There is no indication Y.G. explained his limitations or sought an alternative placement until such time as his disability subsided.

Rebecca Reed-Harrison v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to dismiss criminal charge. Remands with instructions.

State of Indiana v. Lynn Wilson (NFP)
Post conviction. Reverses grant of Wilson’s petition for post-conviction relief.

Ivette Haylett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief.

Charles Huntley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license which was enhanced to a Class C felony due to a prior conviction.

Joel Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to five Class B felonies.

Michael Clay v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of robbery resulting in serious bodily injury as a Class A felony and illegal consumption of alcohol by a minor

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of A.K.; S.K. v. IDCS (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Tracy D. Price v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms decision to order the execution of Price’s suspended sentence after he violated probation terms.

Peters Broadcast Engineering v. WROI-FM (NFP)
Small claims. Affirms judgment in favor of the radio station in a dispute over alleged unpaid balance plus interest of invoices for repair and installation services performed for the station.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Heritage, what Heritage? The New Age is dawning .... an experiment in disordered liberty and social fragmentation is upon us .... "Carmel City Council approved a human rights ordinance with a 4-3 vote Monday night after hearing about two hours of divided public testimony. The ordinance bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, among other traits. Council members Rick Sharp, Carol Schleif, Sue Finkam and Ron Carter voted in favor of it. The three council members opposing it—Luci Snyder, Kevin Rider and Eric Seidensticker—all said they were against any form of discrimination, but had issues with the wording and possible unintended consequences of the proposal." Kardashian is the new Black.

  2. Can anyone please tell me if anyone is appealing the law that certain sex offenders can't be on school property. How is somebody supposed to watch their children's sports games or graduations, this law needs revised such as sex offenders that are on school property must have another non-offender adult with them at all times while on school property. That they must go to the event and then leave directly afterwards. This is only going to hurt the children of the offenders and the father/ son mother/ daughter vice versa relationship. Please email me and let me know if there is a group that is appealing this for reasons other than voting and religion. Thank you.

  3. Should any attorney who argues against the abortion industry, or presents arguments based upon the Founders' concept of Higher Law, (like that marriage precedes the State) have to check in with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program for a mandatory mental health review? Some think so ... that could certainly cut down on cases such as this "cluttering up" the SCOTUS docket ... use JLAP to deny all uber conservative attorneys licenses and uber conservative representation will tank. If the ends justify the means, why not?

  4. Tell them sherry Mckay told you to call, they're trying to get all the people that have been wronged and held unlawfully to sign up on this class action lawsuit.

  5. Call Young and Young aAttorneys at Law theres ones handling a class action lawsuit