ILNews

Opinions Sept. 23, 2010

September 23, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Commitment of A.L.
49A02-1001-MH-76
Mental health. Affirms order of temporary commitment. Any error in the admission of evidence or consideration of Wishard’s argument as to A.L.’s dangerousness was not a blatant violation of fundamental fairness and didn’t cause substantial and apparent harm to her.

Steven D. Hyche v. State of Indiana
49A02-0911-CR-1154
Criminal. Vacates convictions of felony murder and dealing in a controlled substance. Because the record is devoid of any evidence that Hyche was acting in any capacity other than that of a purchaser of ecstasy, it’s insufficient to support a dealing conviction and therefore a felony murder conviction based on the dealing one.

Freudenberg-Nok General Partnership v. Allison Transmission, Inc. (NFP)
49A04-1003-PL-141
Civil plenary. Affirms preliminary injunction requiring Freudenberg-Nok to continue selling parts to Allison Transmission pursuant to the terms of their contracts.

Michael Deloney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1003-CR-281
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and execution of a portion of Deloney’s previously suspended sentences.

Anna Galuoppo v. Richard Galuoppo (NFP)
08A02-1002-DR-199
Domestic relation. Affirms order denying Anna’s motion to correct error in the dissolution of her marriage.

Buffy L. Heckler v. Gary L. Heckler and Beverly J. Heckler (NFP)
32A05-1003-DR-217
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of Buffy Heckler’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs.

Indiana Tax Court had 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. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT