ILNews

Opinions Sept. 7, 2012

September 7, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Robert S. Filus v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
No. 12-1164
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division. Magistrate Judge Roger B. Cosbey.
Civil/Social Security. Affirms denial of disability benefits, holding that substantial evidence supports the decision of the administrative law judge.  

Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re Adoption of M.L.; J.H. v. J.L. and C.L.
29A02-1201-AD-54
Adoption. Affirms trial court ruling that the biological father was an unfit parent and therefore the adoptive parents did not need to get his consent for the adoption.

Kenneth W. Smith and Deb-Anne Smith v. Dermatology Associates of Fort Wayne, P.C. a/k/a Dermatology & Laser Surgery Associates of Fort Wayne, P.C.
02A03-1201-CT-41
Civil tort. Affirms lower court ruling that a burn patient failed to present sufficient evidence to invoke the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.

Timothy A. Bolin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
63A01-1202-CR-89
Criminal. Affirms order modifying sentence after a conviction of Class B felony conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and guilty plea to Class B felony manufacturing methamphetamine.

Dwayne Rhoiney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1107-CR-650
Criminal/rehearing. Reaffirms original opinion upholding trial court sentence for murder, criminal confinement and carrying a handgun without a license.

Damionne M. Nichols v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1203-CR-133
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, a Class B felony.

Janella Datcher v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1111-CR-506
Criminal. Affirms convictions and 35-year sentence for Class A felony child molesting and two counts of Class D felony battery.

Terrance Mitchem v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1110-PC-497
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief for murder, attempted murder, three counts of attempted murder, two counts of rape and one count of criminal deviate conduct.

Lance Scott Boutte v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1202-CR-91
Criminal. Affirms trial court denial of petition to file a belated notice of appeal.

Curtis B. Lay v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1111-CR-1074
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in a schedule III controlled substance.

T.A.B. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1204-JV-154
Criminal. Affirms juvenile court order placing T.A.B. in Indiana Boys School.

Indiana Tax Court
Indiana Dept. of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division v. The Supervised Estate of John A. Schoenenberger, Deceased
49T10-1010-TA-54
Estate. Reverses probate court determination that the estate was entitled to interest on its refund claim computed according to the 1980 version of Indiana Code 6-4.1-10-1 and judgment interest. The tax court held that a refund on inheritance tax paid was done so within the statutorily required timeframe, and therefore the probate court erred in granting the estate interest on its refund claim and judgment interest. Remands for further proceedings.

Indiana Supreme Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.


 

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. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT