ILNews

Opinions Oct. 9, 2013

October 9, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Douglas G. Kildsig v. Warrick County Assessor
82T10-1101-TA-2
Tax. Reverses Indiana Board of Tax Review’s determination that the burden-shifting rule contained in Indiana Code 6-1.1-15-1(p) did not apply to its proceedings. The rule applies to the entire appeals process. Affirms that a portion of Douglas G. Kildsig’s land was properly classified as residential excess acreage for the 2009 tax year. The assessor presented evidence to support Kildsig did not use his land for agricultural purposes.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Specialty Foods of Indiana, Inc., d/b/a Jersey Mike's Subs v. City of South Bend and Century Center Board of Managers
71A05-1302-MI-95
Miscellaneous. Affirms order denying Specialty Foods of Indiana’s complaint for declaratory judgment as to its right to continue operating its business in the college Football Hall of Fame in South Bend under a use management and operations agreement. The force majeure provision of the agreement to be exclusive provider of food and beverages for the College Football Hall of Fame in South Bend is applicable to excuse the Century Center Board of Manager’s nonperformance of its obligations under the agreement because the closure of the Hall of Fame constitutes a “reason not within the reasonable control of Century Center.”

In Re: the Marriage of L.C. v. T.M.
32A01-1303-DR-91
Domestic relation. Reverses denial of mother’s request to modify custody. She presented sufficient evidence of changed circumstances due to participation in a travel soccer league and that modification is in the children’s best interests. Remands for an order to be entered that modifies the custody arrangement in accordance with the children’s best interests.

Custom Radio Corp., Custom Management Group, Inc., Richard Yarger and Robert O'Brien v. Actuaries & Benefit Consultants, Inc., and John M. Fogle
32A01-1303-CC-143
Civil collection. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Fogle and Actuaries & Benefit Consultants Inc. in a suit filed alleging negligent provision of consulting services and breach of oral contract. There is a genuine issue of fact as to whether the appellants’ knew or could have known that their Welfare Benefit Plans were noncompliant with federal law and that their plan contributions were retroactively taxable by April 30, 2004.

Jesse Doyle, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1303-CR-132
Criminal. Affirms denial of request to withdraw guilty plea and eight-year sentence for Class C felony incest.

Derek Dewitt v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1301-CR-33
Criminal. Affirms imposition of consecutive sentences for Class A felony attempted murder and murder convictions.

Darrell Hix v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1303-CR-331
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Jeffrey Cook v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-1211-CR-608
Criminal. Affirms refusal by trial court to give Cook’s proffered jury instruction on self-defense because the evidence didn’t support giving it, and affirms convictions of murder, Class B felony prisoner in possession of a dangerous device or material and class D felony criminal gang activity.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no decisions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I enrolled America's 1st tax-free Health Savings Account (HSA) so you can trust me. I bet 1/3 of my clients were lawyers because they love tax-free deposits, growth and withdrawals or total tax freedom. Most of the time (always) these clients are uninformed about insurance law. Employer-based health insurance is simple if you read the policy. It says, Employers (lawyers) and employees who are working 30-hours-per-week are ELIGIBLE for insurance. Then I show the lawyer the TERMINATION clause which states: When you are no longer ELIGIBLE! Then I ask a closing question (sales term) to the lawyer which is, "If you have a stroke or cancer and become too sick to work can you keep your health insurance?" If the lawyer had dependent children they needed a "Dependent Conversion Privilege" in case their child got sick or hurt which the lawyers never had. Lawyers are pretty easy sales. Save premium, eliminate taxes and build wealth!

  2. Ok, so cheap laughs made about the Christian Right. hardiharhar ... All kidding aside, it is Mohammad's followers who you should be seeking divine protection from. Allahu Akbar But progressives are in denial about that, even as Europe crumbles.

  3. Father's rights? What about a mothers rights? A child's rights? Taking a child from the custody of the mother for political reasons! A miscarriage of justice! What about the welfare of the child? Has anyone considered parent alienation, the father can't erase the mother from the child's life. This child loves the mother and the home in Wisconsin, friends, school and family. It is apparent the father hates his ex-wife more than he loves his child! I hope there will be a Guardian Ad Litem, who will spend time with and get to know the child, BEFORE being brainwashed by the father. This is not just a child! A little person with rights and real needs, a stable home and a parent that cares enough to let this child at least finish the school year, where she is happy and comfortable! Where is the justice?

  4. "The commission will review applications and interview qualified candidates in March and April." Riiiiiight. Would that be the same vaulted process that brought us this result done by "qualified candidates"? http://www.theindianalawyer.com/justices-deny-transfer-to-child-custody-case/PARAMS/article/42774 Perhaps a lottery system more like the draft would be better? And let us not limit it to Indiana attorneys so as to give the untainted a fighting chance?

  5. Steal a little, and they put you in jail. Steal a lot, and they make you king. Bob Dylan ala Samuel Johnson. I had a very similar experience trying to hold due process trampling bureaucrats responsible under the law. Consider this quote and commentary:"'When the president does it, that means it is not illegal,' [Richard] Nixon told his interviewer. Those words were largely seen by the American public -- which continued to hold the ex-president in low esteem -- as a symbol of his unbowed arrogance. Most citizens still wanted to believe that no American citizen, not even the president, is above the law." BWHaahaaahaaa!!!! http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/When-the-president-does-it-that-means-it-is-not-illegal.html

ADVERTISEMENT