Opinions April 15, 2019

Keywords Opinions
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Indiana Court of Appeals
Heraeus Medical, LLC, et al. v. Zimmer, Inc., a Delaware corporation d/b/a Zimmer Biomet, and Zimmer US, Inc., a Delaware corporation

Civil plenary. Affirms in part the Kosciusko Superior Court’s issuance of a preliminary injunction ordering Heraeus Medical LLC to not possess, use, or disclose confidential information received from Heraeus Medical GmbH, or employ or engage the individual defendants in a way that violated their restrictive covenants with Zimmer Biomet or the trial court’s preliminary injunction. However, reverses in part after finding a noncompete and nonsolicitation covenant between Robert Kolbe and Zimmer Biomet employees to be overbroad. Remands to reform it to comply with Indiana law. Also finds in crafting its preliminary injunction, the trial court incorrectly defined the geographic scope of the Kolbe Agreement and applied the term “contact” in a way inconsistent with the Kolbe Agreement.

John W. Homan, Successor Trustee to the February 15, 2013 Trust No. 102433 v. The Unsupervised Estate of Robert L. Homan, deceased
Estate, unsupervised. Affirms the LaPorte Circuit Court’s denial of John Homan’s petition to convert Robert Homan’s estate from unsupervised to supervised and striking the trust agreement from the record. Finds because Robert never declared himself trustee of his farmland, the farmland is not property of the trust. Therefore, the trial court did not err by denying the petition or by striking the trust agreement from the record.

Walter Havvard v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Post conviction. Affirms the denial of Walter Havvard’s petition for post-conviction relief. Finds Havvard’s first attorney, Andrew Maternowski, was not ineffective for failing to initiate an interlocutory appeal of the Marion Superior Court’s denial of the motion to suppress. Rules Havvard’s second attorney, Greg Spencer, was not ineffective for choosing not to file a motion to suppress and choosing to not object to the admission of the evidence at trial because there were strategic reasons for not doing so.

Stephen Murry v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Stephen Murry’s conviction of Level 6 felony intimidation. Rules the Marion Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in admitting an audio recording of Murry’s threat to burn down a home. Finds while some words are unintelligible, the portion of the recording containing Murry’s threat is of sufficient clarity to be intelligible and enlightening to the jury.  

In re the Marriage of: Brian Crump v. Angela Grannan (mem. dec.)
Domestic Relation. Affirms the order modifying Brian Crump’s physical custody of his two children. Finds the recording of Crump berating for two minutes his crying 7-year-old son, was a “shocking display of verbal abuse.” Rules Hamilton Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in modifying physical custody of the children. Also finds no evidence to support Crump’s claim the children’s mother is “deliberately suppressing her income.” Concludes the trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining to impute income to Mother.  

Yolanda R. Marshall v. HSBC Bank USA, National Association (mem. dec.)
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms the trial court’s order denying Yolanda Marshall’s motion to compel discovery and her motion to set aside the “In Red Summary Judgment, Default Judgment and Decree of Foreclosure” entered in favor of HSBC Banks USA, National Association, As Trustee for Option One Mortgage Loan Trust, 2007-HL1, Asset-Back Certificates, Series 2007-HL1. Finds the Hamilton Superior Court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Marshall’s motion to compel pursuant to her argument under Trial Rule 60Z(B)(8). Rules that based on the evidence, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Marshall’s motion to set aside.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}