ILNews

Opinions Sept. 4, 2012

September 4, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Nathan S. Berkman v. State of Indiana
45A04-1111-CR-583
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for murder. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in declaring a witness unavailable or in admitting the deposition testimony of another unavailable witness. Berkman’s sentence is not inappropriate as he had argued.

Hood's Gardens, Inc. v. Jason Young, Craig Mead d/b/a Discount Tree Excavation a/k/a D & E Tree Extraction
29A04-1201-PL-8
Civil plenary. Reverses dismissal of Hood’s Gardens’ declaratory judgment action involving Craig Mead, Jason Young and D&E Tree Extraction seeking to not have to pay workers’ compensation benefits to Young. The exclusivity provisions of the Worker’s Compensation Act did not give the board exclusive jurisdiction to decide the simple contract construction issue raised in the trial court by HG. Remands for further proceedings.
 
Tommi Emerson Winn v. State of Indiana
42A04-1201-CR-49
Criminal. Reverses denial of Winn’s motion for bail bond reduction. While the severity of the 13 charges supports setting the bail at $25,000, the absence of any other factors to suggest Winn is a flight risk means the court should have granted his request to deposit an amount not less than 10 percent of bail under I.C. 35-33-8-3.2(a). Judge Brown concurs in part.

Heather N. Kesling v. Hubler Nissan, Inc.
49A02-1111-CT-1031
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment to Hubler Nissan on Kesling’s Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act, Indiana Crime Victims Relief Act, and fraud claims. There is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Hubler made a representation that the car was safe to operate. Judge Friedlander dissents.

Dennis J. Rodenberg v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1201-CR-10
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony rape.

Damon T. Payne, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1204-CR-190
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed for three counts of Class D felony theft.

Charles B. Dietzen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1112-CR-1104
Criminal. Affirms order reinstating suspended sentence.

Victoria Yates v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1202-CR-126
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Olympia Shellman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1201-CR-34
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea.

James W. Manhart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
16A04-1203-CR-131
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition to convert convictions from Class D felonies resisting law enforcement and operating a vehicle while intoxicated to Class A misdemeanors.

Artrece D. Patterson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-1112-CR-693
Criminal. Affirms finding of violation and revocation of probation.

Noble Potter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A01-1112-CR-619
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony residential burglary and being a habitual offender.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT