Jan. 29, 2026

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Estate of Beverly K. Webster, Deceased; Christopher D. Webster v. Fred William Webster, Christina Kay Webster, and Katie Doades, individually and as Co-Personal Representatives of the Estate of Beverly K. Webster
No. 24A-ES-2788

Civil. Appeal from the Daviess Circuit Court, Judge Gregory A. Smith. Affirms the trial court’s orders enforcing a mediated settlement agreement resolving a will contest and estate disputes and awarding attorney fees. Holds the settlement agreement governing distribution of estate assets was ambiguous as to the scope of “all real estate” and, after considering extrinsic evidence including the decedent’s will and related agreements, the trial court did not err in interpreting the agreement to apply to 32.035 acres rather than all estate real estate. Further holds the agreement did not invalidate the decedent’s will or its specific devises, and the probate court’s approval of the compromise did not adjudicate the merits or set aside the will. Concludes Christopher Webster breached multiple provisions of the settlement agreement by failing to make required payments, dismiss the will contest, and comply with payment obligations, while Fred William Webster complied. Affirms the award of attorney fees to Fred William Webster as caused by Christopher Webster’s breach and affirms closure of the estate. Appellant’s attorneys: Adam R. Doerr and Kevin D. Koons, Kroger, Gardis & Regas, LLP; Lucas John Rowe, The Rowe Law Firm. Appellee’s attorneys: Kathryn E. DeWeese and Ryan M. Heeb, Bunger & Robertson.

The following opinions were posted after The Indiana Lawyer’s Jan. 28 deadline. 

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Tonya Robinson and Albert Smith
Nos. 24-1910 & 24-2310

Criminal. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Judge Jon E. DeGuilio. Affirms in part and reverses in part. Affirms Robinson’s and Smith’s wire fraud convictions, concluding the evidence permitted a reasonable jury to find that the charged wire furthered a kickback scheme involving fraudulent invoices and payments at the Housing Authority of South Bend. Reverses the bank fraud convictions, holding the government failed to identify any false statement made to a bank, as required under 18 U.S.C. § 1344(2), and that the use of checks alone did not transform a scheme to defraud the Housing Authority and HUD into bank fraud under Loughrin v. United States. Further holds the district court did not err in denying the defendants’ motions for judgment of acquittal on the wire fraud count and properly rejected arguments based on United States v. Durham. Affirms the application of a two-level abuse-of-trust sentencing enhancement to Smith under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3, concluding the record supported the finding that Smith occupied and abused a position of trust at the Housing Authority.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Jose Reyna
No. 23-1231

Criminal. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Robert L. Miller, Jr. Affirms the judgment of conviction. Holds that 18 U.S.C. § 922(k), which prohibits possession of a firearm with a removed, altered, or obliterated serial number, does not violate the Second Amendment. Although expressing doubt that the challenge could be resolved solely at the first step of the Bruen framework based on constitutional text alone, the Court holds under Bruen as clarified by United States v. Rahimi that § 922(k) is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Concludes that founding-era laws requiring firearms to be inventoried, inspected, marked, or stamped for militia readiness and public accountability are relevant historical analogues supporting modern serialization requirements. Accordingly, holds § 922(k) is a valid firearm regulation and rejects Reyna’s facial constitutional challenge.