Court opinions

Indiana Court of Appeals
Brady McDaniel v. State of Indiana
25A-CR-798
Criminal. Affirms the Madison Circuit Court’s denial of Brady McDaniel’s motion for a mistrial. Finds the court gave a timely admonishment to the jury to disregard the improper reference to McDaniel’s conditional driver’s license. Also finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the motion for a mistrial. Attorney for appellant: Brandon Townsend. Attorney for appellee: Attorney General Todd Rokita, Courtney Staton

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jason Stanke v. Nichole Schmitt
25A-DC-555
Domestic relations with children.  Affirms the Hendricks Superior Court’s calculation of Nichole Schmitt’s weekly gross income. Finds the trial court erred when it deviated from the parties’ stipulation and recalculated Jason Stanke’s income. Reverses and remands for recalculation of the parties’ respective child support obligations using the father’s weekly gross income as stipulated. Attorney for appellant: Rachelle Ponist. Attorneys for appellee: Zachariah Phillips, Sarah Schnautz.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Craig R. Hendry v. State of Indiana
25A-CR-22
Criminal. Affirms Craig Hendry’s convictions in Vermillion Circuit Court of Level 6 felony stalking and Class B misdemeanor aiding, inducing, or causing harassment. Finds the evidence of Hendry’s impermissible contacts with P.K.—including banging on her door, filming her through her closed blinds, and following her to her car—support his conviction for stalking. Also finds the record supports the conclusion that Hendry’s posting of inflammatory videos on YouTube and his provision of the city’s contact information therewith “so that [his viewers] could call” constituted aiding, inducing, or causing the harassment of city workers. Attorney for appellant: Kay Beehler. Attorneys for appellee”: Attorney General Todd Rokita, Jennifer Anwarzai.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Speedway, LLC v. Kendall Shedd
25A-EX-1386
Workers’ compensation. Dismisses Speedway’s appeal of the Full Worker’s Compensation Board’s denial of its motion to dismiss Shedd’s claim. The court holds that the board’s order was not a final appealable order, as it did not resolve all issues or include Trial Rule 54(B) certification. The board had found that no settlement occurred between Shedd and the third-party tortfeasor because no payment was issued under the signed release, meaning Speedway’s statutory termination argument was premature. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P. and Tower Bridge International Services, L.P. v. Federal Insurance Company, U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA
25A-PL-1067
Civil plenary. Affirms the Marion Superior Court’s granting of a motion by Federal Insurance Company, U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and National Union Fire Insurance Company to dismiss a complaint filed by Cantor Fitzgerald and Tower Bridge due to lack of personal jurisdiction. Finds the nonresident defendants did not avail themselves of personal jurisdiction in Indiana either through the admittance statute or their contacts with the state. Also finds Cantor did not make a threshold showing that personal jurisdiction might exist over them. Also denies Cantor’s request for more time to conduct discovery. Attorneys for appellants: Gregory Gotwald, Christopher Kozak. Attorneys for appellees: Scott Harkness, Katelyn Juerling, Kelly Milam.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Taylor Building Corporation of America v. Brett Milton, et al.
25A-PL-1290
Civil plenary. Reverses the Carroll Circuit Court’s denial of Taylor Building Corporation of America’s motion to compel mediation and arbitration in a contract agreement dispute with Brett and Amanda Milton. Finds that the parties agreed to mediate and arbitrate the claims filed in this action, Taylor did not waive its right to enforce the mediation and arbitration provisions, and, consequently, the trial court erred in denying Taylor’s motion to compel mediation and arbitration. Remands with instructions for the court to grant that motion and order the parties to participate in mediation and, if necessary, binding arbitration administered by the AAA. Attorneys for appellant: Michael Dorelli, Grantland Clapacs,Zechariah Banks. Attorney for appellees: John Kraft.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Constance Samplawski v. Anchor Land Management, LLC
25A-PL-1210
Civil plenary. Affirms a Porter Superior Court order granting Anchor Land Management, LLC, a preliminary injunction that prohibits Constance Samplawski from blocking Anchor’s use of an easement over her property. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it concluded Anchor established a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits and entered a preliminary injunction prohibiting Samplawski from blocking Anchor’s use of the easement from the dominant Estate over the servient estate.Attorney for appellant: Patrick McEuen. Attorney for appellee: Daniel Blankenburg.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Catherine Adkins v. State of Indiana
25A-PC-438
Post-conviction relief. Affirms the Wayne Superior Court’s denial of Catherine Adkins’ motion for declaratory judgment that Indiana Post-Conviction Rule 1(10) —a rule limiting when a court may impose a harsher sentence after post-conviction relief— would cap any future sentence for her at 30 years. Finds the rule limits a court’s authority to resentence a defendant for the same offense after post-conviction relief. Also finds it neither curtails the state’s authority to file a new charge based on new evidence nor restricts the sentencing court from applying the proper statutory range to that conviction. Attorneys for appellant: Amy Karozos, James Ackllin. Attorneys for appellee: Todd Rokita, Caroline Templeton.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Treyburn Lakes Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Solomon L. Scott, et al.
25A-CC-646
Civil collections. Reverses the Marion Superior Court’s order where the court refused to include the Treyburn Lakes Homeowners Association, Inc.’s prior attorney fees in the foreclosure decree against Solomon Scott and reduced the association’s request for attorney fees in the foreclosure action itself from $5,754 to $1,424 without conducting a hearing. Finds the trial court abused its discretion by excluding from the foreclosure judgment the amounts for attorney fees and costs awarded in prior judgments that were secured by the association’s lien that was being foreclosed. Also finds the trial court also abused its discretion when it awarded only 20% of the association’s attorney fees and costs associated with the current foreclosure proceeding without conducting a hearing. Remands with instructions for the trial court to: (include unpaid attorney-fee and costs awards from prior judgments in the foreclosure decree and  conduct a hearing at which the parties may present evidence about the reasonableness of the attorney fees requested by the association for this foreclosure proceeding. Attorney for appellant: Zachary Cronkhite. No attorney listed for appellee.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Adil Rafiq v.State of Indiana
25A-CR-269
Criminal. Affirms Adil Rafiq’s convictions in Marion Superior Court of of Level 1 felony child molesting1 and Level 4 felony child molesting, as well as his aggregate sentence of 25 years. Finds Rafiq’s child molesting convictions did not subject Rafiq to double jeopardy, and his 25-year sentence is not inappropriate in light of the nature of his offenses and his character. Attorney for appellant: Josiah Swinney. Attorneys for appellee: Attorney General Todd Rokita, Samuel Dayton.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Harold E. Chastain v. State of Indiana
25A-XP-1105
Expungement. Affirm the Elkhart Superior Court’s s denial of Harold Chastain’s motion to amend his expungement petition. Finds that Chastain’s request to supplement his January 2021 petition to expunge the records from case number FC-75 was not permitted under Indiana Code section 35-38-9-9(k). Attorney for appellant: David Wemhoff. Attorneys for appellee: Attorney General Todd Rokita, Ian McLean.

Indiana Tax Court
Ovidiu Ciceu v. Knox County Assessor
24T-TA-16
Tax. Affirms the Indiana Board of Tax Review’s reduction of Ovidiu Ciceu’s 2023 property tax assessment from $153,600 to $111,000. Finds that the board made no reversible error, properly applied the law, and correctly considered the evidence. Also rejects as untimely two arguments raised by Ciceu for the first time in his reply brief and denies the Knox County Assessor’s motion to strike portions of Ciceu’s reply brief.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Anthony J. Giger, et al. v. Joshua L. Hogue
25A-PL-448
Civil plenary. Affirms the Brown Circuit Court’s denial of Anthony Giger and his wife’s request for a permanent injunction that would have required Joshua Hogue to remove five speed bumps he installed on an access easement road. Finds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Gigers’ request for a permanent injunction. Also deny Hogue’s request for appellate attorneys’ fees. Attorney for appellants: Roger Young. Attorneys for appellee: Hamish Cohen, Jeffrey Furminger.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Karen Guilford v. Edward Guilford
24A-DC-1587
Domestic relations with children. Affirms the Dearborn Circuit Court’s property division and its division of Dogecoin, a Mercedes, and life insurance policies in the dissolution of Edward and Karen Guilford’s marriage. Finds the trial court’s property division methodology was permissible under Roetter, and its specific asset valuations represented credibility determinations supported by competent evidence. Reverses the trial court’s determinations of the wife’s income, the award of rehabilitative maintenance, and the award of attorney fees. Finds the trial court erroneously imputed income to the wife at a level unsupported by the evidence and then relied on that erroneous level of income when it determined the issues of rehabilitative maintenance and attorney fees. Remands for the trial court to enter a new order on those issues without hearing any new evidence or argument from the parties. Attorney for appellant: Elizabeth Dodd. Attorney for appellee: Jenna Rohrig.

Indiana Court of Appeals
GSE Realty LLC, Gordon D. Emmert and Stacey I. Emmert v. Leslie R. Miller
25A-PL-669
Civil plenary. Reverses the Parke Circuit Court’s grant of a prescriptive easement to Leslie Miller regarding the gravel driveway beyond Point A as shown on Figure 3 (Exhibit M). Affirms the remaining prescriptive easement awarded by the trial court to Miller. Finds the Emmerts have failed to demonstrate that the trial court’s grant of a prescriptive easement on the remaining property at issue here is clearly erroneous. Remands and the appellate court does not address the Emmerts’ argument regarding the particularity of the permanent injunction awarded to Miller. Attorney for appellants: Glen Koch II. Attorneys for appellee: William Gooden, Kristin McKinney, Jennifer Perry.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Club Newtone, Inc., and Marc Vaughn v. Jarissa Gillaspy
24A-CT-1239
Civil tort. Affirms a Tippecanoe Circuit Court’s jury $2.5 million damages  award in favor of Jarissa Gillaspy after she filed a lawsuit alleging Marc Vaughn and Club Newtons Inc.’s federal counterclaims constituted malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Finds The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony. Also finds sufficient evidence supports the jury’s verdict, and the award is not excessive. Attorneys for appellants: Ryan Munden, S. Kyle Dietrich. Attorney for appellee: Duran Keller.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of M.L. (Minor Child) and A.L. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services and Kids’ Voice of Indiana
25A-JC-399
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms the Marion Superior Court’s e CHINS adjudication of M.L. Finds that evidence established that the coercive intervention of the court is necessary until the mother demonstrates her ability to provide appropriate care for the child’s special medical needs over an extended period of time. Also finds the trial court was reasonably concerned about the mother’s long-term ability to meet the child’s medical and nutritional needs given her historical inability to do so. Attorney for appellant: Sarah Medlin. Attorneys for appellee: Attorney General Todd Rokita, Abigail Recker.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of E.K., a Child in Need of Services, and R.J. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services
25A-JC-703
Juvenile CHINS. Reverses the Lawrence Circuit Court’s ruling that E.K. is a child in need of services. Finds the trial court committed reversible error by considering and relying on the substantive facts contained in the Juvenile Problem Solving Court’s orders. Attorneys for appellant: Daniel Dixon, Patrick Smith. Attorneys for appellee: Attorney General Todd Rokita, David Corey.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Emily Winchester v. Zackery Winchester
25A-DC-1199
Domestic relations with children. Reverses the Allen Superior Court’s decision that Indiana may not exercise jurisdiction over custody matters under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act and the court’s order to return Emily and Zackery Winchester’s two minor children to the United Kingdom under the Hague Convention. Finds there is no indication the father has initiated a court proceeding in any state or federal court under the Hague Convention or received an order directing the children’s return. Also finds the mother has shown prima facie error in the trial court’s judgment granting the ICACU application and ordering the children’s return under the Hague Convention. Remands for further proceedings. Attorneys for appellant: Suzanne Wagner, Katherine Geist. No attorney listed for appellee.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Brent Thomas Wills v. State of Indiana
24A-CR-1453
Criminal. Affirms Brent Wills’ convictions in Tippecanoe Superior Court  of two counts of operating while intoxicated causing death as Level 4 felonies and one count of operating while intoxicated causing serious bodily injury as a Level 5 felony. Also affirms Wills’ 28- year aggregate sentence. Finds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and that Wills’ sentence is not inappropriate. Also finds that no compelling evidence exists justifying a revision of Wills’ sentence. Senior Judge John Baker dissents with separate opinion. Attorneys for appellant: James Voyles, Tyler Helmond. Attorneys for appellee: Attorney General Todd Rokita, John Oosterhoff.