ILNews

Opinions Oct. 5, 2012

October 5, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Thursday:

Citimortgage, Inc. v. Shannon S. Barabas a/k/a Shannon Sheets Barabas, ReCasa Financial Group, LLC, and Rick A. Sanders
48S04-1204-CC-00213
Civil collection. Reverses denial by trial court of mortgagee Citimortgage’s motion to intervene and obtain relief from the foreclosure judgment instituted by second mortgagee ReCasa Financial without notice to Citimortgage. Citimortgage had an interest in this case sufficient to entitle it to intervene as of right, and its motions to intervene and for relief were timely. Remands with instructions to amend the default judgment to provide that ReCasa took the Madison County property subject to Citimortgage’s lien.

Friday's opinions

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions before IL deadline Friday.

Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions before IL deadline Friday.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Heartland Crossing Foundation, Inc. v. Chris M. Dotlich
55A01-1203-SC-119
Small claims. Affirms judgment in favor of Dotlich on a breach of contract claim, holding that the trial court did not err in rejecting Heartland’s claim for attorney fees assessed on the late payment of homeowner association dues. The trial court had called an “administrative fee” assessed to Dotlich “nothing more than an abusive junk fee.”

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of T.O., S.O., B.O., R.O., Z.O., E.O., & G.O. (Minor Children), and J.C. (Mother) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
85A05-1204-JT-170
Juvenile/termination of parental rights. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Joseph J. Suscha v. State of Indiana (NFP)
06A01-1203-CR-95
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony resisting law enforcement and Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Keith Hosea v. State of Indiana (NFP)
24A01-1202-CR-76
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Christopher Cones v. Tina (Cones) Iannotti (NFP)
49A02-1108-DR-783
Domestic relation. Dismisses in part and reverses in part, rejecting father’s appeal as untimely, ordering a revaluation of the family business and ordering recalculation of child support due. Judge Brown concurs in part and dissents in part.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT