ILNews

Opinions Sept. 3, 2010

September 3, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Trent L. Chapin v. Fort-Rohr Motors Inc.
09-1347
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Civil. Reverses denial of Fort-Rohr’s motion for judgment as a matter of law after a jury found in Chapin’s favor in his retaliation suit. Fort-Rohr was entitled to judgment as a matter of law because Chapin did not produce sufficient evidence to support an actual or constructive discharge.

Indiana Supreme Court
In the Matter of Anonymous
No. 10S00-1006-DI-288
Discipline. The high court privately reprimands a Clark County attorney for violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 5.5(a) for assisting in the unauthorized practice of law in this state. Respondent agreed to serve as local counsel for Kentucky attorney John Redelberger who represented an Indiana client. Once in court, the judge informed Respondent that Redelberger was not licensed to practice law in Indiana. Respondent told Redelberger he must seek temporary admission and sent Redelberger a copy of the applicable rule; however neither followed through on obtaining temporary admission. The Supreme Court noted that Indiana attorneys serving as local counsel for out-of-state attorneys are hereby advised of the importance of their duty to ensure complete and timely compliance with all the requirements of Admission and Discipline Rule 3(2).

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Unsupervised Estate of Judith E. Phillips v. Rainer Assmann (NFP)
40A05-1001-EU-33
Estate, Unsupervised. Affirms trial court judgment in favor of Assmann for $34,514.04, concluding it did not abuse its discretion in ruling on the competence of Assmann’s testimony under the Dead Man’s Statute.

Daniel E. Hoagland, et al. v. Dorothy H. Mosier, et al. (NFP)
76A03-0911-CV-521
Civil. Affirms trial court’s judgment approving a signed memorandum of agreement and quieting title to each party’s lot.

Ahmed Bellamy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1002-CR-54
Criminal. Affirms trial court order that Bellamy serve the remainder of his outstanding sentence imposed after his probation revocation.

The following opion was posted after IL deadline Thursday.

Indiana Tax Court
6787 Steelworkers Hall, Inc. v. John R. Scott, Assessor of Porter County
No. 49T10-0906-TA-27
Tax. Affirms Indiana Board of Tax Review’s determination that Local 6787’s banquet facility is not predominately used for education or charitable purposes and therefore is 100 percent taxable.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT