ILNews

Supreme Court grants 2 transfers

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to two cases today, including a highly litigated case regarding negligence claims and the construction and renovation of an expanded library location in downtown Indianapolis.

In The Indianapolis-Marion County Public Library v. Charlier Clark & Linard, P.C., and Thornton Tomasetti Engineers, No. 06A05-0804-CV-239, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of the engineering and construction companies, ruling the economic-loss doctrine bars the library's negligence claims against the companies.

The library filed suit against the companies as a result of delays and defects in the construction of the central library in Indianapolis.

Judge Elaine Brown dissented because she believed there is a question of fact regarding imminent danger as to Thorton Tomasetti Engineers and that summary judgment under the economic-loss doctrine was inappropriate.

In Reynaldo A. Griffin v. State of Indiana, No. 71A03-0805-CR-260, the appellate court ruled a defendant charged with possessing drugs within 1,000 feet of a school only has the burden of placing the issue of statutory defense in question where the state's evidence hasn't done so. The Court of Appeals split in affirming Reynaldo Griffin's possession conviction based on whether he was briefly within 1,000 feet of the school. The majority ruled he wasn't in front of the school briefly and upheld his conviction. Judge Ezra Friedlander dissented because he believed there was no indication that if he hadn't been stopped, Griffin would have been within 1,000 feet of the school any longer than it took him to walk by it. Judge Friedlander would reduce the Class D felony conviction and remand for re-sentencing.

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. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  2. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  3. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  4. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

ADVERTISEMENT