ILNews

Opinions Sept. 26, 2011

September 26, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Angela K. Farno v. Ansure Mortuaries of Indiana, LLC, et al.
41A05-1002-PL-104
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of Farno’s motion for class certification on superiority grounds regarding the alleged looting of cemetery trusts that had been funded from proceeds of purchases of pre-need burial services. The trial court did not err in finding the receiver’s action provided a superior method to recovery any of the missing trust funds.

Matthew Goldberg, et al. v. Angela K. Farno, et al.
41A01-1007-MF-348
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms certification of plaintiff class for settlement purposes and order granting preliminary approval of the settlement agreement. Goldberg has no standing to challenge the settlement because he hasn’t suffered plain legal prejudice. Adopts the “plain legal prejudice” standard based on Federal Rule 41(a)(2).

Starlett Gilbert v. State of Indiana
49A04-1102-CR-77
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony prostitution. The police officer’s testimony at trial was not hearsay and Gilbert had the opportunity to cross-examine the officer, but did not.

Joshua J. Hubble v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A05-1012-CR-741
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to causing death while operating a motor vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalent of 0.15 or more as a Class B felony, two counts of Class D felony criminal recklessness, and Class D felony criminal mischief.

Thomas M. Slaats v. Sally E. Slaats (NFP)

87A01-1009-DR-523
Domestic relation. Affirms order modifying child support and parenting time.

Michael Reynolds v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1012-CR-799
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony manufacturing methamphetamine.

Jeremy Cuzzort v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A05-1101-CR-51
Criminal. Affirms denial of request to pursue a belated appeal.

Derrick R. Davis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-1008-PC-571
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to one case and declined five for the week ending Sept. 23.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's an appreciable step taken by the government to curb the child abuse that are happening in the schools. Employees in the schools those are selected without background check can not be trusted. A thorough background check on the teachers or any other other new employees must be performed to choose the best and quality people. Those who are already employed in the past should also be checked for best precaution. The future of kids can be saved through this simple process. However, the checking process should be conducted by the help of a trusted background checking agency(https://www.affordablebackgroundchecks.com/).

  2. Almost everything connects to internet these days. From your computers and Smartphones to wearable gadgets and smart refrigerators in your home, everything is linked to the Internet. Although this convenience empowers usto access our personal devices from anywhere in the world such as an IP camera, it also deprives control of our online privacy. Cyber criminals, hackers, spies and everyone else has realized that we don’t have complete control on who can access our personal data. We have to take steps to to protect it like keeping Senseless password. Dont leave privacy unprotected. Check out this article for more ways: https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-privacy-in-the-age-of-internet-of-things/

  3. You need to look into Celadon not paying sign on bonuses. We call get the run

  4. My parents took advantage of the fact that I was homeless in 2012 and went to court and got Legal Guardianship I my 2 daughters. I am finally back on my feet and want them back, but now they want to fight me on it. I want to raise my children and have them almost all the time on the weekends. Mynparents are both almost 70 years old and they play favorites which bothers me a lot. Do I have a leg to stand on if I go to court to terminate lehal guardianship? My kids want to live with me and I want to raise them, this was supposed to be temporary, and now it is turning into a fight. Ridiculous

  5. Here's my two cents. While in Texas in 2007 I was not registered because I only had to do it for ten years. So imagine my surprise as I find myself forced to register in Texas because indiana can't get their head out of their butt long enough to realize they passed an ex post facto law in 2006. So because Indiana had me listed as a failure to register Texas said I had to do it there. Now if Indiana had done right by me all along I wouldn't need the aclu to defend my rights. But such is life.

ADVERTISEMENT