ILNews

Supreme Court grants 2 transfers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court granted two transfers Sept. 4, including one involving whether a juvenile court can order probation after a juvenile is ordered to commitment in the Department of Correction.

In the case In the Matter of R.J.G. v. State of Indiana, No. 64A04-0803-JV-130, the Indiana Court of Appeals disagreed with a previous ruling by the appellate court that found Indiana Code Section 31-30-2-1 to mean a juvenile court can't order probation if it has ordered a term of commitment to the DOC. The Court of Appeals in the instant case affirmed the juvenile court's order that R.J.G. be placed on probation following a term of commitment to the DOC. The appellate court did remand the case for an entry of recommended DOC commitment as opposed to a determinate commitment.

In Gary Community School Corp. v. Tom Powell, No. 45A03-0701-CV-17, the Court of Appeals ruled Tom Powell's part-time coaching position was not eligible for Family and Medical Leave Act coverage when he took a medical leave of absence because the coaching job is considered separate from his full-time teaching job. His teaching position was reinstated when he returned from his leave because FMLA applies only to full-time jobs.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Contact Lea Shelemey attorney in porter county Indiana. She just helped us win our case...she is awesome...

  2. We won!!!! It was a long expensive battle but we did it. I just wanted people to know it is possible. And if someone can point me I. The right direction to help change the way the courts look as grandparents as only grandparents. The courts assume the parent does what is in the best interest of the child...and the court is wrong. A lot of the time it is spite and vindictiveness that separates grandparents and grandchildren. It should not have been this long and hard and expensive...Something needs to change...

  3. Typo on # of Indiana counties

  4. The Supreme Court is very proud that they are Giving a billion dollar public company from Texas who owns Odyssey a statewide monopoly which consultants have said is not unnecessary but worse they have already cost Hoosiers well over $100 MILLION, costing tens of millions every year and Odyssey is still not connected statewide which is in violation of state law. The Supreme Court is using taxpayer money and Odyssey to compete against a Hoosier company who has the only system in Indiana that is connected statewide and still has 40 of the 82 counties despite the massive spending and unnecessary attacks

  5. Here's a recent resource regarding steps that should be taken for removal from the IN sex offender registry. I haven't found anything as comprehensive as of yet. Hopefully this is helpful - http://www.chjrlaw.com/removal-indiana-sex-offender-registry/

ADVERTISEMENT