ILNews

Opinions Aug. 16, 2010

August 16, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Gail M. Flatow and Flatow Comer, LLP v. Dwane Ingalls
49A02-0910-CV-994
Civil. Reverses denial of Flatow and Flatow Comer’s motion for summary judgment in Ingalls’ suit for legal malpractice. There is no designated evidence in the malpractice litigation to show the result of Ingalls’ partial motion for summary judgment would have been any different had a reply been filed. As a matter of law, the Flatow defendants had no duty to provide the services Ingalls claims they were negligent in failing to provide.

Paternity of P.B.; D.B. v. M.B
03A01-1001-JP-5
Juvenile paternity. Reverses and remands denial of mother’s petition to modify parenting time. The preponderance standard should have been used as the burden of proof, not clear and convincing evidence. Affirms finding father wasn’t in contempt for keeping P.B. extra days over the Christmas holiday week, the denial of mother’s request father pay her attorney’s fees and P.B.’s therapist’s fees, and the modification of the Christmas parenting time schedule.

Teresa Perry v. Whitley County 4-H Clubs Inc.
92A03-1002-CT-101
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for Whitely County 4-H Clubs on Perry’s negligence complaint for personal injuries suffered during a horse competition sponsored by the club. There is no genuine issue of material fact and the Indiana Equine Activity Statute bars her claim for injuries resulting from inherent risks of equine activities.

William R. Morell, III v. State of Indiana
06A04-0909-CR-531
Criminal. Affirms conviction of battery by means of a deadly weapon as a Class C felony. The trial court didn’t abuse its discretion or commit reversible error by failing to swear the state’s witnesses and failing to allow questioning related to the alleged violations of the trial court’s separation order outside the presence of a jury. The cumulative effect of Morrell’s alleged errors don’t warrant reversal and there is sufficient evidence to support the conviction.

Arvester Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1001-CR-10
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony criminal confinement while armed with a deadly weapon and Williams’ aggregate sentence for criminal confinement as a Class B felony and possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon as a Class B felony.

Brian A. Eby v. Jennifer L. Eby (NFP)
29A05-0909-CV-521
Civil. Reverses amended decree dissolving the Ebys’ marriage. Remands with instructions.

Matthew Donoho v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A05-0912-CR-717
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony theft and possession of marijuana, Class C felony burglary, and Class A misdemeanor criminal mischief.


Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court granted no transfers for the week ending Aug. 13.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  2. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  3. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  4. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  5. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

ADVERTISEMENT