The following opinions were posted after IL deadline Thursday.
Indiana Supreme Court
Caesars
Riverboat Casino, LLC v. Genevieve M. Kephart
31S01-0909-CV-403
Civil. Reverses trial court denial of Caesar’s motion to dismiss Kephart’s counterclaim under Trial Rule 12 (B)(6)
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Holds that no common law right exists for patrons to recover
damages for casino gambling losses. Justice Boehm concurs in result and Justice Dickson dissents.
Sheehan
Construction Co., Inc., et al. v. Continental Casualty Co., et al.
49S02-1001-CV-32
Civil. Reverses trial court grant of summary judgment in favor of the insurers on grounds that there was no damage to the
property and thus there was no “occurrence” or “property damage” and remands for further proceedings.
Faulty workmanship may constitute an accident and thus an occurrence depending on the facts under a standard commercial general
liability insurance policy. Chief Justice Shepard and Justice Sullivan dissent.
State
of Indiana v. James S. Hobbs, IV
19S01-1001-CR-10
Criminal. Reverses trial court finding that the search violated the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana
Constitution and the consequent suppression of the fruits of the search. Hobbs’ car was an operational vehicle in a
public place, the dog sniff wasn’t conducted under circumstances where Hobbs was unconstitutionally seized and the dog
sniff provided probable cause that the car contained evidence of a crime. Justice Sullivan dissents in which Justice Rucker
joins.
Thomas
P. Donovan v. Grant Victoria Casino & Resort, L.P.
49S02-1003-CV-124
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for the casino on Donovan’s breach-of-contract claim and declaratory judgment that
the casino can’t exclude him for counting cards. The long-standing common law right of private property owners extends
to the operator of a riverboat casino that wishes to exclude a patron for employing strategies designed to give the patron
a statistical advantage over the casino. The Riverboat Gambling Act, which gives the Indiana Gaming Commission exclusive authority
to set the rules of licensed casino games, does not abrogate this common law right. Justice Dickson dissents.
Today’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Annex
Books, Inc., et al. v. City of Indianapolis, Ind.
09-4156
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Affirms preliminary injunction of ordinance requiring adult bookstores to be closed certain hours. The single article
introduced by Indianapolis didn’t support its argument and the evidence of arrest data near the plaintiffs’ store
appears to support the plaintiffs.
United
States of America v. Charles Suggs
09-2700
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge David F. Hamilton.
Criminal. Affirms District Court’s application at sentencing of a four-level increase for using or possessing
a firearm in connection with another felony offense after Suggs pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm.
The District Court could reasonably conclude that Suggs grasped the handgun while resisting officers, ignored their orders,
and that his grasp on the handgun without telling officers about his gun implied an intent to bring it forth and use it in
some manner.
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Lawrence
Terrell Davis v. State of Indiana
45A04-1002-CR-97
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony auto theft, Class D felony resisting law enforcement, Class A misdemeanor resisting
law enforcement, and for being a habitual offender. Davis failed to show that the trial court failed to give him the required
advisement that by waiving his right to a jury trial on the underlying offenses that he also waived his right to a jury trial
in the habitual offender phase. Remands with instructions to enter a habitual offender enhancement that is consistent with
the opinion.
Gary
S. Moore v. State of Indiana (NFP)
47A01-1001-CR-31
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.
Cory
A. Waltmire v. State of Indiana (NFP)
44A03-1002-CR-103
Criminal. Affirms sentences following guilty plea to two counts of Class C felony reckless homicide.
Daniel
L. Lannen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1004-CR-221
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony manufacturing methamphetamine.
Corey
Stewart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1003-CR-139
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.














vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.
Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.