ILNews

Opinions Sept. 10, 2010

September 10, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Joseph Finch, David E. Hensley, and Peter W. Mungovan v. Bart Peterson, individually and in his official capacity, et al.
09-2676
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch.
Civil. Affirms denial of the city officials’ motion for judgment on the pleadings in a suit filed by three white officers alleging discrimination in promotions. The 1978 consent decree between the Indianapolis Police Department and the U.S. Department of Justice does not operate to confer qualified immunity on city officials who were involved in making the challenged promotions. Nothing in the decree required them to take race into consideration when making promotions.

Indiana Supreme Court
Lyn Leone, et al. v. Commissioner, BMV
49S02-0910-CV-505
Civil. Affirms denial of preliminary injunction sought by the plaintiffs to prevent the BMV from revoking driver’s licenses when the names from BMV and Social Security Administration records do not match. The class hasn’t shown a likelihood of success. Dissolves the preliminary injunction entered by the Indiana Court of Appeals as a stay pending appeal.
 
Indiana Court of Appeals
Charles Adam Trotter v. State of Indiana
29A02-0910-CR-974
Criminal. Reverses denial of motion to suppress and the grant of the state’s motion to clarify. The trial court ruled that although the warrantless entry into the residence was unconstitutional, the suppression of the evidence wasn’t necessary based upon the doctrine of attenuation. The warrantless entry violated both federal and state constitutions. The proper remedy for the constitutional violation is the suppression of evidence. Remands for further proceedings.  

Crown Coin Meter Company, et al. v. Park P, LLC  
34A02-1002-PL-185
Civil plenary. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Park P in its complaint to quiet title and seeking a declaratory judgment that the lease between Crown Coin and the prior owner of the apartment building is void as to Park P. There is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Park P had actual implied notice of Crown Coin’s outstanding rights at the time Park P purchased the property and whether Park P was a bona fide purchaser. Remands for further proceedings.

Eclipse Consulting, Inc. v. Community Bank (NFP)
29A05-0912-CV-696
Civil. Affirms grant of partial summary judgment in favor of Community Bank in Eclipse’s suit alleging breach of contract, fraud, conversion and bad faith. Remands for proceedings.

David L. Howard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A03-0907-CR-299
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and 65-year sentence with five years suspended to probation for murder.

Jeanette Haggard v. Brent Boyd (NFP)
32A04-1001-DR-33
Domestic relation. Affirms granting the dependent tax exemption to Boyd. Reverses calculation of the amount of child support Boyd has overpaid since he filed his petition to modify and remands with instructions to amend its order on father’s petition to modify custody and support accordingly.

D.L.S. v. J.S. (NFP)
85A02-0910-CV-985
Civil. Affirms order granting physical custody of D.S.’s children to mother J.S.

Edna Taylor Living Trust v. Kokomo/Howard County Plan Comm. (NFP)
80A05-1004-PL-289
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the commission on the Taylor Trust’s complaint for mandate.

Chance Ross Carper v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-1002-CR-96
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT