Opinions March 23, 2020

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinions were posted after IL deadline Friday:
Molly Joll v. Valparaiso Community Schools
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division. Magistrate Judge John E. Martin.
Civil. Reverses the grant of summary judgment to Valparaiso Community Schools on Molly Joll’s sex discrimination claim but affirms the grant of summary judgment on Joll’s age discrimination claim. Finds Joll offered evidence that would allow a reasonable jury to find that the school district used hiring procedures tilted in favor of male applicants, applied sex-role stereotypes during the interview process and manipulated the criteria for hiring in ways that were inconsistent except that they always favored male applicants. Remands for trial on the sex discrimination claim. Judge Kenneth Ripple dissents with separate opinion.

USA v. Christopher Davis and Maurice Greer
18-3129, 18-2634
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Criminal. Affirms Christopher Davis’ and Maurice Greer’s convictions for robbing Walmart stores. Finds a rational jury could have found each man guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Monday’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court
City of New Albany v. Board of Commissioners of the County of Floyd
Miscellaneous. Affirms the Floyd Superior Court’s entry of declaratory judgment in favor of Floyd County, concluding that the TurnOver Provision in the lease was valid pursuant to Indiana Code section 36-9-13-22(a)(6).

Indiana Court of Appeals
Soller Point Company, et al. v. L.M. Zeller, et al.
Civil collection. Affirms the Vanderburgh Superior Court’s order awarding L.M. Zeller $26,729 in damages, plus prejudgment interest, for unpaid elevator service and building maintenance claims at an Evansville building owned by Soller Point Co. Reverses the trial court’s subsequent grant of a motion to correct error filed by Zeller, finding the trial court no longer had jurisdiction of the case because the Court of Appeals had assumed jurisdiction over Soller Point’s appeal.

Chins: D. B., et al. v. Indiana Department of Child Services
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms the Bartholomew Circuit Court’s admission of lab reports in D.B.’s child in need of services case. Finds the lab reports of both parents’ drug tests are business records under the business-records exception in Indiana Evidence Rule 803(6). Finds the trial court did not err in adjudicating the child as a CHINS. Judge Edward Najam concurs in result.

In re the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of Ch.W and Ca. W. (Minor Children) and M.W. (Father) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination. Affirms the termination of M.W.’s parental rights to his minor children, Ch.W. and Ca.W. Finds evidence clearly supports the Marion Superior Court’s conclusions that there is a reasonable probability that the conditions that led to the children’s removal from their parent’s home would not be remedied and that the continuation of the parent-child relationship poses a threat to the children’s wellbeing.

Richard Chambers v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Richard Chambers’ murder conviction. Finds evidence of probative value exists from which the Marion Superior Court could have found Chambers guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of murder.

Justin Lee Johnson v. Kellecina Lynn Grabhorn (mem. dec.)
Domestic relation. Affirms the denial of Justin Johnson’s petition for modification of custody, parenting time, and child support; and the trial court’s award of attorney fees. Finds the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions regarding the modification of custody to be sufficient, supported by the evidence, and are not clearly erroneous. Finds the Marion Superior Court’s judgment is not contrary to law and that it did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorneys fees to Mother.

In re the Matter of G.E.T., N.T., and G.T.T. (Minor Children), R.T. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services, and Child Advocates, Inc. (mem. dec.)
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms the adjudication in Marion Superior Court of R.T.’s three minor children as children in need of services. Finds the Department of Child Services did not fail to present sufficient evidence to support the adjudication.

Ryan Haskin v. Tammy Haskin (mem. dec.)
Domestic relations with children. Affirms the Hamilton Circuit Court’s division of property and award of attorney’s fees in Ryan Haskin’s divorce from Tammy Haskin. Finds no abuse of discretion from the trial court.

Abasifreke Ukpong v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms the imposition of Abasifreke Ukpong’s previously suspended sentenced after his probation revocation. Finds the Hendricks Superior Court did not abuse its discretion by imposing his previously suspended sentence on work release.

Kearney W. Walters, III v. Carrie Walters (mem. dec.)
Domestic relations without children. Reverses the Howard Superior Court’s final decree dissolving Kearney Walters III’s marriage to Carrie Walters. Remands for the trial court to reassess the value of the marital estate in light of the erroneous delineation of an alleged marital asset as a marital debt in the amount of $1,500. Instructs the trial court to reconsider the evidence of husband’s credit card debt without considering the handwritten notation “Wife” in the margin in Exhibit 1. Orders that it issue a revised final decree reflecting the value of the marital estate and the division of assets and liabilities in a manner consistent with the decision after correcting those errors. Judge Elizabeth Tavitas dissents with separate opinion.

Roger P. Orich v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Roger Orich’s five-year sentence for conviction of Level 5 felony possession of child pornography. Finds the Lake Superior Court did not abuse its discretion by overruling Orich’s objection to the inclusion of the charging information and probable cause affidavit in the presentence investigation report. Nor did the trial court abuse its discretion in its identification of aggravating and mitigating factors.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below