Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Alexander
Gatzimos, M.D. v. Boone County and State of Indiana
06A05-0911-CV-664
Civil. Grants the state’s motion to dismiss Dr. Gatzimos’ appeal of the trial court order denying his petition
for expungement. Remands to the trial court to allow Gatzimos the opportunity to present admissible evidence as to whether
his charges were dismissed because of mistaken identity; no offense was actually committed; or there was an absence of probable
cause.
William
Nolan v. City of Indianapolis
49A02-1002-CT-192
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for the City of Indianapolis. The COA holding in Nolan’s criminal appeal that
his arrest was lawful precludes him from re-litigating that issue in a civil case brought by him for false arrest and false
imprisonment.
Phyllis
Woodsmall, et al. v. Lost Creek Township Conservation Club, Inc.
84A01-1001-PL-33
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment denying homeowners injunctive relief on Woodsmall and the other’s nuisance claim. The
evidence doesn’t lead solely to the conclusion that Lost Creek used its property to the detriment of the homeowners.
Joshua
H. Field v. State of Indiana (NFP)
67A05-1003-CR-262
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor intimidation and remands with instructions to vacate this conviction
and sentence.
N.L.,
Alleged to be CHINS; B.L. v. Marion County DCS and Child Advocates (NFP)
49A02-1002-JC-140
Juvenile. Affirms determination that N.L. is a child in need of services.
Kyle
Kiplinger v. State of Indiana (NFP)
62A01-1004-CR-195
Criminal. Affirms 65-year sentence for murder imposed during a re-sentencing hearing.
Michael
Hay v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1002-CR-90
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony theft.
Dennis
Roberson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A04-1001-PC-102
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
Quentin
A. Spencer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-1002-CR-62
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies fraud and theft.
Neil
A. Short v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1002-CR-54
Criminal. Affirms conviction of sexual misconduct with a minor as a Class C felony.
George
D. Harding, II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A05-1003-CR-202
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of sexual misconduct with a minor as Class C felonies.
Lusako G. Musopole v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1002-CR-71
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated.
Maurits
Wiersema v. Lisa (Wiersema) Bauman (NFP)
02A03-0912-CV-571
Civil. Affirms valuation of Wiersema’s IMAGI holdings at the time of final separation at $1,000,000.00, including 2007
tax refunds in the marital estate, assigning half of the Sycamore Hills membership to Bauman, assigning the Bauman Investment
to Bauman, and assessing GAL fees. Reverses decision to include unvested portions of Wiersema’s IMA 401(k) in the marital
estate and failure to assign liability for half of certain property taxes paid post-filing by Wiersema to Bauman. Remands
to revise the final dissolution order so as not to include the unvested portions of Wiersema’s 401(k) in the marital
estate, assign half of the property tax liability to Bauman, and recalculate the distribution of the marital estate as appropriate.
Robert
Coslet v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1003-CR-147
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed after revocation of probation.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.














The court of appeals not only tries to rewrite or interpret the law to suit their fancy, now they choose play stupid as well. Every consideration must be given to pro se litigants, who are not held to the same standards as attorneys, as stated by,SCOTUS. I assume they didn't have a lawyer, since one wasn't mentioned and I strongly suggest thatb the rest of the, origional petitioners get back in there and fight for their rights.
the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.