ILNews

Opinions Oct. 7, 2011

October 7, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

James Fernbach v. State of Indiana
69A01-1103-CR-151
Criminal. Affirms 60-year sentence for two counts of Class A felony attempted murder, holding that the jury’s rejection of Fernbach’s insanity defense was not erroneous.

Joseph A. Taylor v. Alan P. Finnan
48A02-1105-MI-547
Miscellaneous. Reverses trial court’s dismissal of Taylor’s writ of habeas corpus. Affirms trial court’s finding that Taylor’s claim should have proceeded as a petition for post-conviction relief, but that the court should have transferred the case to Floyd County – where Taylor had been convicted and sentenced – rather than dismiss it. Remands to transfer the case to Floyd County.

Lisa A. Davis v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and VOCA of Indiana LLC
93A02-1101-EX-14
Agency appeal. Affirms decision of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development Review Board, which affirmed a decision by an administrative law judge determining Davis had been terminated for cause and therefore was ineligible for unemployment benefits. Holds that Davis had failed to provide good cause for missing a hearing and that her employer provided substantial evidence that Davis was terminated for just cause, including theft.

Kelley Seibert d/b/a Seibert's Kennel v. Rick Bryant (NFP)
48A04-1011-SC-750
Small claim. Reverses small claims court’s judgment in favor of Bryant, holding that the trial court erred in ignoring a provision in the contract between Bryant and Seibert. Remands with orders to enter judgment in favor of Seibert.

Jerramy Moore v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1104-CR-294
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of marijuana.

Bane Elliott v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A05-1008-CR-566
Criminal. Affirms convictions of four counts of child molesting, but remands to the court to revise Elliott’s 40-year sentence to 35 years, holding that Elliott had met his burden of establishing that his sentence was inappropriate.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

 

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