Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Donald
L. Pruitt v. State of Indiana
55A01-0912-CR-597
Criminal. Affirms denial of Pruitt’s motion to suppress, who was charged with operating a motor vehicle after driving
privileges had been forfeited for life as a Class C felony. The lack of limiting language in Indiana Code Section 9-30-10-17
supports that Indiana Code sections 9-21-18-1 to 9-21-18-15 do not bar law enforcement officers from investigating violations
in private parking lots in the absence of a contractual agreement with the property owner. Concludes the police officer had
reasonable suspicion to stop Pruitt for driving without headlights.
SPCP
Group, LLC v. Dolson, Inc., et al.
19A01-0912-CV-604
Civil. Affirms denial of SPCP Group’s motion for partial summary judgment and grant of Holland’s cross-motion
for summary judgment on SPCP’s complaint seeking foreclosure of a mortgage on Holland’s real property. The undisputed
facts establish that the mortgage SPCP seeks to foreclose inaccurately and inadequately describes the debt it purports to
secure, and as a result, SPCP cannot establish an essential element of its claim.
Andy
Alafogianis, et al. v. Joseph Guffey, et al. (NFP)
33A01-1003-PL-98
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment in favor of Guffey in his suit for the balances owed on each account held by Alafogianis
for work Guffey’s companies completed in Alafogianis’ restaurants.
T.J.
and Ginger Richard v. Janet Egolf (NFP)
25A04-1001-SC-28
Small claims. Affirms judgment in favor of Eglof on the Richards’ claim of being sold an allegedly lame horse, and
in favor of Eglof in her counterclaim regarding costs to care for the horse when the Richards left it with her.
Qwinces
LLC, et al. v. Viking Hardwoods, Inc., et al. (NFP)
17A03-1002-CC-102
Civil collections. Reverses default judgment and damages award in favor of Viking Hardwoods in their suit alleging breaches
of contract against Quinces and remands for further proceedings.
R.R.
v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-0912-EX-1227
Civil. Affirms denial of unemployment compensation benefits.
Bettye
Alvis v. Professional Account Service, Inc. (NFP)
84A04-1004-PL-253
Civil plenary. Reverses order awarding Alvis $500 in attorney’s fees and no costs following summary judgment in her
favor on her wage payment claim. Remands with instructions to award Alvis $6,460 in attorney fees and $364.17 in costs.
Adoption
of W.G.; D.M. and K.M. v. T.G. (NFP)
67A05-1001-AD-105
Adoption. Reverses order granting father T.G.’s motion to set aside the grandparents’ adoption of W.G. based
on fraud. Remands with instructions to reinstate the adoption decree.
Jamie
Keys v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1002-CR-101
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.
Curtis
D. Holiday v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1005-CR-603
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony possession of cocaine.
Wayne
Jewell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A05-1002-PC-115
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
Wayne
Miller v. Jennifer Shue (NFP)
34A04-1002-SC-105
Small claims. Affirms small-claims judgment in favor of Shue for $3,600 and remands for the court to determine an amount
of appellate attorney’s fees and costs to which Shue is entitled.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
The Indiana Supreme Court granted one transfer and denied transfer to 27 cases for the week ending Sept. 30.














The court of appeals not only tries to rewrite or interpret the law to suit their fancy, now they choose play stupid as well. Every consideration must be given to pro se litigants, who are not held to the same standards as attorneys, as stated by,SCOTUS. I assume they didn't have a lawyer, since one wasn't mentioned and I strongly suggest thatb the rest of the, origional petitioners get back in there and fight for their rights.
the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.