ILNews

Opinions Oct. 9, 2012

October 9, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals released no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court released no opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Ralph Jennings d/b/a A Cut Above Tree Service v. Terrance Kinnard (NFP)
49A05-1203-CC-117
Collections. Reverses and remands trial court’s grant of relief to Kinnard from a default judgment of $4,189.22 for the plaintiff.
 
Jeffrey Allen Rowe v. Bruce Lemon, et al
49A02-1204-PL-344
Civil Plenary. Court of Appeals affirms in part, reverses in part and remands the summary judgment denying an Indiana Department of Correction inmate kosher meals. The court ruled the DOC did not establish either that the vegan meal plan is kosher or that the inmate lacked sincere religious reasons for requesting a kosher diet.    

Paul R. Semenick v. State of Indiana
49A02-1111-CR-1035
Criminal. Court of Appeals reverses conviction for criminal trespass finding insufficient evidence to sustain the conviction. The court ruled that the state failed in its burden to prove material elements of criminal trespass because it did not present evidence disavowing the individual’s contractual interest in being on the property and did not establish the breadth of an occasional part-time contract employee’s authority.

Jon E. Garcia v. State of Indiana
20A04-1202-CR-257
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony criminal recklessness, holding that the trial court properly denied Garcia’s motion for a directed verdict. The court held that a car meets the definition of “a place where people are likely to gather” under I.C. 35-42-2-2(c)(3)(A), the criminal recklessness statute involving discharge of a firearm that creates a risk of bodily injury.  

American Cold Storage, et al v. The City of Boonville
87A01-1112-PL-610
Civil plenary/annexation. Divided court reverses annexation and remands to the trial court, holding that the trial court erred in counting separate state-owned parcels that were purchased to build State Road 62 rather than counting the road as a single parcel under the remonstrance statute, thereby making it impossible for remonstrators to satisfy the 65 percent rule.

Thomson, Inc. n/k/a Technicolor USA, Inc., Technicolor Inc., and Technicolor Limited v. Continental Casualty Co., Travelers Casualty & Surety Co., et al.
49A02-1202-PL-80
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s judgment in favor of defendants, holding that the trial court did not err in basing its judgment on comity in deference to a California decision on the matter, but the court did not address the plaintiff’s other arguments.

Travis Koontz v. State of Indiana
29A05-1202-CR-77
Criminal. Divided court affirms trial court denial of motion to correct error for misdemeanor sentences that exceeded the statutory authority, finding that Koontz waived any error in his sentence by consenting to it as part of a plea agreement.
 
Indiana Public Employee Retirement Fund v. Paul Bryson
49A04-1201-MI-2
Miscellaneous/disability. Divided court affirms a trial court decision setting aside a PERF ruling that Bryson was entitled to Class 2 impairment disability benefits and finding Bryson instead entitled to Class 1 benefits. The appeals court held that the trial court did not err because a pre-existing condition did not impair his abilities to perform job duties as a firefighter and that his covered impairment is a direct result of three on-duty personal injuries.

Theothus Carter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A05-1203-CR-137
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s 65-year aggregate resentence on Class A felony convictions of attempted murder and attempted robbery and Class B felony convictions of burglary and being a habitual offender.

Marion Spencer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1204-CR-137
Criminal. Affirms Class A misdemeanor conviction of criminal recklessness while using a vehicle and remands to the trial court for correction of the judgment of conviction and CCS.

Norman Trent v. State of Indiana (NFP)
54A01-1202-CR-51
Criminal. Affirms trial court denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Bobbie Buckles v. State of Indiana (NFP)
17A05-1206-CR-300
Criminal. Affirms sentences for Class C felony possession of precursors and Class B felony possession of methamphetamine.

John Ray Henry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1111-CR-533
Criminal. Affirms sentence for two counts of Class C felony child molesting.

Carl L. Johnson v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Williams Systems LLC (NFP)
93A02-1203-EX-205
Executive administration/unemployment. Affirms determination of the Department of Workforce Development that Johnson was not entitled to unemployment benefits.

Victor Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1109-CR-860
Criminal. Affirms trial court convictions of robbery and attempted robbery as Class B felonies.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT