7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Marcus Conner v. Dennis Reagle, Warden
22-1780
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Prisoner. Affirms the dismissal of Marcus Conner’s habeas petition. Finds the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to equitably toll the limitations period governing Conner’s section 2254 petition.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
Joshua N. Pennington v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-CR-374
Criminal. Affirms the denial of Joshua Pennington’s petition to file a belated appeal on his sentence of 14 years in the Indiana Department of Correction for sexual misconduct with a minor, a Level 4 felony, and possession of child pornography, a Level 6 felony. Finds the Tippecanoe Superior Court was correct to deny the petition without a hearing. Also finds Pennington is not eligible to appeal his sentence, due to a waiver provision in his plea agreement that plainly stated he was giving up the right to appeal his sentence.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
R.G. v. J.S. (mem. dec.)
22A-PO-2546
Protection order. Dismisses R.G.’s appeal because it is unable to address his arguments concerning Hendricks Superior Court’s orders denying his motions for relief from judgment and dismissing his combined motion to enforce settlement agreement and motion for breach of contract. Finds he waived the issues he attempted to raise because he failed to comply with the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
A trial court’s order for two people to pay expenses related to a discovery dispute wasn’t warranted because the defendants’ underlying motion to compel wasn’t completely successful.
A bank robbery sentence that “far exceeds” the statutory minimum must be revisited, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in vacating the sentence.
In two separate but related cases, the Court of Appeals of Indiana has upheld economic incentives for the development of solar facilities in Pulaski County.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
Connie Ehrlich, et al. v. Moss Creek Solar, LLC, and the Pulaski County Council
22A-PL-1732
Civil plenary. Affirms the Pulaski Superior Court’s order confirming a resolution by the Pulaski County Council that created an Economic Revitalization Area and approved a tax abatement for a proposed commercial solar development by Moss Creek Solar. Finds the remonstrators have standing, but their argument under the applicable statute fails.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana relied on controlling precedent to affirm a lower court’s ruling that three prospective Cass County jurors could remain fair and impartial even after they heard prejudicial statements made against a defendant.
The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
A.B. and D.B., individually and as parents of C.B., a disabled minor v. Brownsburg Community School Corporation
22-1277
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson.
Civil. Reverses the district court’s denial of attorney fees to A.B. and D.B. Finds A.B. and D.B. were the prevailing party in an administrative proceeding. Also finds attorney fees could be awarded. Remands for further consideration.
The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Friday:
Karen R. Hirlston v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
22-2067
Civil. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Chief Judge Tanya Walton Pratt. Affirms the district court’s judgment and the jury’s finding. Finds the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing both plaintiff and defendant to introduce a few photographs of the workplace that had not been disclosed in discovery and sees no risk of unfair prejudice. Also finds Karen Hirlston forfeited her appellate challenge to the jury instruction by failing to make a timely objection.
A nonprofit that purports to help police departments failed to convince the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that newspaper articles questioning its legitimacy were defamatory, with the appellate court affirming a lower court’s decision.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
Santana J. Gray v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-PC-1992
Post-conviction relief. Affirms the Marion Superior Court’s denial of Santana Gray’s post-conviction relief petition. Finds no error.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
On the Level Fence & Deck Inc. v. Indiana Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Indiana
22A-CT-3073
Civil tort. Reverses the denial of the motion for default judgment and remands the matter to the Lake Superior Court for further proceedings. Finds that On the Level Fence & Deck’s failure to answer the complaint was the result of excusable neglect. Judge Peter Foley dissents with a separate opinion.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
Tarah L. Weaver v. Samuel B. Weaver (mem. dec.)
22A-DC-2111
Domestic relations with children. Affirms the Kosciusko Superior Court’s order for Tarah Weaver to pay Samuel Weaver $2,250 in attorney fees, finding that Tarah had filed several untimely and defective motions. Finds no abuse of discretion by the trial court.
The Biden administration weakened regulations protecting millions of acres of wetlands Tuesday, saying it had no choice after the Supreme Court sharply limited the federal government’s jurisdiction over them.
Since the SFFA opinion was handed down, legal scholars and practitioners across the country have been grappling with the full extent of the holding.
Election-related lawsuits have challenged Indiana laws as they relate to ballot access for both candidates and voters. Decisions in those cases handed down in recent months have been mostly favorable to existing Indiana law.
After running into another roadblock on its quest to overturn a state law that limits its operations in Indiana, The Bail Project isn’t committing one way or the other on whether it will continue working in the state.
Read Indiana appellate court decisions from the most recent reporting period.
A commercial court acted within its discretion in appointing a master to enforce the terms of a settlement agreement reached in a shareholder lawsuit, the Court of Appeals of Indiana affirmed Tuesday.