ILNews

Opinions Sept. 7, 2011

September 7, 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
Christopher A. Andrews v. Sara L. Ivie
55A01-1103-PO-110
Protective order. Affirms issuance of a protective order in favor of Ivie. Andrews engaged in a knowing or an intentional course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of Ivie that would cause a reasonable person to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, or threatened.

Isaiah Christmas v. Kindred Nursing Centers Limited Partnership d/b/a Windsor Estates Health and Rehabilitation Center
34A05-1101-CT-1
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment for Kindred Nursing Centers in Christmas’ complaint claiming injuries and alleging negligent maintenance of the sidewalk. There is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Christmas was invited to enter Windsor’s premises and as to whether Windsor breached its duty of care. Remands for further proceedings.

State of Indiana v. David G. Bruno, Jr. (NFP)
18A05-1102-CR-55
Criminal. Affirms grant of Bruno’s motion to suppress evidence.

Rodney G. Cooper v. State of Indiana (NFP)

82A01-1102-CR-48
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of methamphetamine.

Celina Insurance Company v. Indianapolis Roofing and Sheet, et al. (NFP)

49A02-1103-CT-196
Civil tort. Affirms order granting the cross-motions for summary judgment of Indianapolis Roofing and Sheet Metal Corp., Nazareth Building Services, and CE & M Inc., and denying Celina Insurance Co.’s motion for partial summary judgment in its subrogation action against them.

Shane William Kervin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1008-CR-474
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

David Malone v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1010-CR-1226
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony intimidation.

K.T. v. Review Board, and F.C.I. (NFP)

93A02-1101-EX-75
Agency appeal. Reverses decision by the Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development affirming the administrative law judge’s conclusion that K.T. left his employment without good cause and is therefore ineligible for unemployment benefits. Remands for further proceedings.

Joseph M. Campbell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A04-1103-CR-126
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony child molesting.

Joseph Dontaus Banks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1010-CR-547
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony resisting law enforcement and Class D felony criminal recklessness. Remands with instructions to vacate Banks’ conviction of Class B misdemeanor reckless driving.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.E.B., K.H.B., Jr., and M.R.B.; C.M.B. v. IDCS (NFP)
02A03-1012-JT-665
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT