Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowIndiana Court of Appeals
Civil Commitment of L.F. v. Sandra Eskenazi Mental Health Center
26A-MH-658
Mental health. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge David J. Certo. Affirms temporary commitment of L.F. for up to 90 days, finding sufficient evidence to support both the commitment and a treatment plan requiring medication over her objection. Police took L.F., who has schizophrenia, to Eskenazi after finding her standing in traffic. While hospitalized, she exhibited delusions, assaulted another patient and resisted medication. On appeal, L.F. argued the commitment was inappropriate because it allowed forced medication without sufficient evidence under In re Mental Commitment of M.P. The Court of Appeals held the record showed that an individualized assessment found that the medication (Abilify) would substantially benefit her condition, that the benefits outweighed risks and her concerns, and that alternative treatments were considered and rejected. The court found clear and convincing evidence supported overriding her refusal of medication and the commitment order. Judge Weissmann authored the opinion. Judges Brown and Foley concurred. Appellant’s attorney: Sarah Medlin, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis. Appellee’s attorneys: Bryan H. Babb and Seema R. Shah, Bose McKinney & Evans LLP.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Jeffrey Gray v. Rodney Scott Benham, Lumberjack’s Bar & Grill and Jeremy Shadday
25A-CT-2588
Civil tort. Appeal from the Jennings Superior Court, Judge Gary L. Smith. Affirms dismissal of Jeffrey Gray’s claims with prejudice after the trial court granted defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding Gray failed to timely commence his action within the two-year statute of limitations. Gray sued after being physically attacked at a bar but, though he filed his complaint on the final day of the limitations period, he did not tender the summonses until eight days later. The Court of Appeals held that under Trial Rule 3, an action is not commenced unless the complaint is filed, the filing fee is paid and the summonses are tendered within the limitations period. Because Gray failed to timely tender the summonses, his action was untimely. The court also rejected Gray’s reliance on the discovery rule, finding the complaint showed he knew or should have known of his injuries on the date of the attack. Judge Felix authored the opinion. Judge Mathias concurred. Judge May concurred in result without opinion. Appellant’s attorneys: Bryce A. Wagner, The Wagner Law Firm PLLC, Tallahassee, Florida. Appellee Benham’s and Lumberjack’s attorney: Jeremy M. Dilts, Carson LLP, Fort Wayne. Appellee Shadday’s attorney: Jefferson C.M. Kisor, Bascom & Kisor, Lawrenceburg, Indiana.
The following opinion was issued on April 9 after The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline.
Indiana Supreme Court
Tervarus L. Gary v. State of Indiana
25S-CR-265
Criminal. Appeal from the Elkhart Superior Court, Judge Kristine A. Osterday, on petition to transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals. Affirms Gary’s Level 5 felony conviction for possession of a device capable of causing bodily injury by an incarcerated person, holding that sufficient evidence showed he knowingly and voluntarily retained pepper spray in jail after having a reasonable opportunity to surrender it. After his arrest, Gary was taken to jail with a canister of pepper spray in his pocket. Although he later alerted officers to the item, he refused repeated commands to surrender it and instead attempted to use it as leverage for a phone call and cell transfer, even discharging it under his cell door before eventually relinquishing it when officers used force. The Indiana Supreme Court held that even if Gary did not voluntarily bring the contraband into the jail, the statute criminalizes knowingly retaining such material once an inmate becomes aware of it and has a reasonable opportunity to relinquish it. Because the evidence showed Gary failed to do so, his continued possession was voluntary and supported his conviction. Chief Justice Loretta H. Rush authored the opinion. Justices Mark S. Massa, Geoffrey G. Slaughter, Christopher M. Goff and Derek R. Molter concurred. Appellant’s attorneys: Christopher J. Petersen and Warren D. Murphy, Goshen. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Attorney General.
This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.