ILNews

Opinions Oct. 6, 2011

October 6, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no opinions from Indiana courts at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court
Putnam County Sheriff v. Pamela Price
60S01-1012-CV-665
Civil. Reverses trial court’s denial of the Putnam County Sheriff’s motion to dismiss Price’s negligence action for failure to state a claim. A county sheriff’s department that neither owns, maintains or controls a county road does not owe a common law duty to warn the public of known hazardous conditions upon the roadway. Justices David and Dickson concur in result.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Catherine A. Littleton v. State of Indiana
49A04-1101-CR-25
Criminal. Reverses denial of Littleton’s motion to dismiss charges of Class C felony criminal confinement, Class D felony neglect of a dependent, and Class B misdemeanor battery. Remands for dismissal of the charges. Littleton’s conduct comes within the scope of her statutory qualified immunity as a teacher managing a classroom, and the trial court abused its discretion in denying her motion to dismiss.

In Re Petition in Opposition to Annexation Ordinance F-2008-15 v. The City of Evansville
82A05-1102-PL-84
Civil plenary. Affirms the denial of the remonstrators’ motion to correct error and the dismissal of their challenge to the proposed annexation of certain parcels of land by the city of Evansville. The appellate court can’t grant the remonstrators any effective relief because they failed to request a stay or file a notice of appeal before the annexation became effective, and their challenges are now moot.

Andrew Kesling v. Dorothy Kesling, Adam Kesling and Emily Kesling
46A03-1103-DR-77
Domestic relation. Reverses judgment approving an arbitrator’s award that required Andrew Kesling to make a shareholder distribution from funds of a closely held corporation as requested by siblings Emily and Adam Kesling after they intervened in the dissolution of Andrew’s marriage to Dorothy Kesling. Andrew was entitled to request a jury and could not be compelled to submit to arbitration under the auspice of the Family Law Arbitration Act. The arbitrator exceeded the scope of her authority.

Anthony J. Sims v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1102-CR-80
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony rape and remands with instructions to vacate the conviction of and sentence for Class C felony incest.

Adam L. Shull v. Mari E. Shull (NFP)
43A03-1103-DR-104
Domestic relation. Affirms distribution of marital property.

In Re the Paternity of R.T.; A.G., et al. v. C.T. (NFP)
34A04-1012-JP-792
Juvenile. Affirms order granting father C.T.’s petition to relocate R.T. to Kentucky and denying mother A.G.’s motion to modify custody.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT