Court opinions

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jessika Aarius Terrell v. State of Indiana
No. 26A-CR-861

Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge Jeffrey L. Marchal. Jessika Aarius Terrell was convicted of three counts of Level 5 felony kidnapping and three counts of Level 6 felony interference with custody, receiving a 10-year sentence with part served in the Department of Correction and part suspended to probation. Upon appeal, the court found double jeopardy between the convictions, reversed the interference with custody convictions, and remanded for resentencing on the kidnapping convictions. On remand, a nine-year sentence was imposed, with the court citing Terrell’s poor conduct in prison as an aggravating factor. Terrell’s appeal on the basis that the trial court could not consider post-sentencing behavior was rejected, affirming that evidence of a defendant’s conduct after original sentencing can be taken into account. Judge Vaidik authored the opinion, with Judges Altice and Foley concurring.
Appellant’s attorney: Timothy Morgan, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Posey County Council v. Kim Cross
No. 25A-MI-2804

Appeal from the Posey Superior Court, Judge Travis L. Clowers. Kim Cross, the prison matron of Posey County, sought to receive the same salary as the jail commander, asserting that Indiana law mandated equal pay for positions of equal rank within the Sheriff’s Department. The Posey County Council, which had set Cross’s salary lower than the jail commander’s, contested this claim, arguing that it had authority over salary determinations and that Cross’s assertion was barred by laches and waiver. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Cross, determining that the Sheriff alone had the authority to rank the matron and that laches and waiver did not apply. The appellate court affirmed the ruling, emphasizing the clear statutory requirement for equal pay. Judge Weissmann authored the opinion, with Chief Judge Tavitas concurring in result with a separate opinion, and Judge Foley also concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: Chad J. Sullivan, Joshua A. Claybourn and James L Baker, Jackson Kelly PLLC, Evansville. Appellee’s attorney: Erin Bauer, Barber & Bauer LLP, Evansville.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Richard Highbaugh v. Exelead, Inc.
No. 25-2638

Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Richard L. Young. Before Circuit Judges Easterbrook, Maldonado and Taibleson. The court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Exelead, concluding that Highbaugh failed to show that the company’s stated justification for not promoting him was pretextual. Highbaugh, who alleged discrimination based on race and age after being passed over for a management position, did not provide sufficient evidence to dispute the employer’s rationale of selecting a candidate with more relevant experience. Circuit Judge Maldonado authored the opinion. There are no concurrences or dissents.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Alberto Garcia-Rodriguez v. State of Indiana
No. 26A-PC-1121

Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Magistrate Michelle Waymire. In this case, the court reversed the post-conviction court’s denial of Alberto Garcia-Rodriguez’s petition for post-conviction relief. The court concluded that Garcia-Rodriguez’s trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to properly prosecute a motion for dismissal under Indiana Criminal Rule 4(B) due to delays in his trial. The post-conviction court acknowledged counsel’s “critical error” but denied the petition based on an incorrect assumption that the trial court would have prioritized a non-speedy-trial case over Garcia-Rodriguez’s speedy-trial request. The appellate court determined that, under applicable legal standards, the trial court would have been required to dismiss the charges against Garcia-Rodriguez had his counsel proceeded correctly. Judge Mathias authored the opinion, with judges Kenworthy and DeBoer concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: Amy E. Karozos, Public Defender of Indiana; and Steven L. Nisi, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis. Appellee’s attorneys: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Paul Shafer, et al. v. Jason W. Grube, et al. 
Appeal from the La Porte Circuit Court, Judge Julianne K. Havens. The trial court denied the plaintiff’s motion for immediate possession and eviction while granting partial summary judgment in favor of the defendant, ordering specific performance. The court found that Rochester had not breached the purchase agreement and had substantially performed its obligations, leading to the order for Shafer to proceed with the transfer of real estate. Judge Bradford authored the opinion. Chief Judge Tavitas and Judge Felix concurred. Appellants’ attorneys: David A. Buls, Scott J. Fandre, David M. Johnson, Krieg DeVault LLP, Crown Point. Appellees’ attorneys: Christopher J. Braun, Jonathan P. Emenhiser, Joanne R. Sommers, Mary Claire Tuohy, Plews Shadley Racher & Braun LLP, Indianapolis.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Derek Fields v. USA
No. 24-2913

Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Cristal C. Brisco. Before Circuit Judges Hamilton, Lee and Taibleson. Petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The court affirms the denial of Fields’s motion for relief without an evidentiary hearing. Although Fields argued ineffective assistance of counsel concerning a purported 37-year plea offer, he failed to show that, had he accepted it, he would have received a lower sentence. The court found that the records conclusively demonstrated no prejudice stemming from his counsel’s performance. Circuit Judge Taibleson authored the opinion.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Sandra Hunter and Marla Strappe v. Elanco Animal Health Incorporated, et al.
No. 23-3061

Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker. Before Circuit Judges Jackson-Akiwumi, Lee and Pryor. This appeal addresses the dismissal of a proposed securities class action against Elanco Animal Health and its executives. The district court concluded that the plaintiffs, asserting claims under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, failed to meet the heightened pleading requirements related to material misrepresentations and scienter. The court found that the plaintiffs did not adequately allege that Elanco’s channel-stuffing practices constituted fraud, nor that the executives intended to deceive investors about product demand. Thus, the court dismissed the proposed second amended complaint with prejudice. Judge Pryor authored the opinion, with Judges Jackson-Akiwumi and Lee joining. There were no concurrences or dissents.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
EHF-INDIANA4 LLC, as successor in interest to GMF-INDIANA4 LLC v. M&M Investment Group LLC and First Merchants Bank
No. 25A-TP-2505

Appeal from the Warrick Circuit Court, Judge Greg A. Granger. EHF-INDIANA4 LLC appealed the issuance of a tax deed after falling behind on property taxes and the subsequent sale of the property at a tax sale. The trial court ruled that EHF’s constitutional claims regarding an unconstitutional taking and an excessive fine were unfounded and granted the buyer’s petition. The Appeals Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling, aligning with a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the auction price as the basis for just compensation, dismissing EHF’s arguments for fair market value compensation. Judge Weissmann authored the opinion, with Chief Judge Tavitas and Judge Foley concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: James D. Johnson, Mark T. Abell and Chandler A. Lacy, Jackson Kelly PLLC, Evansville. Appellee’s attorney: Cassandra A. Nielsen, Krieg DeVault LLP, Indianapolis.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
USA v. Johntavis Matlock
No. 23-3374

Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Judge Matthew P. Brookman. Before Circuit Judges Sykes, Hamilton and Pryor. The court affirms Matlock’s conviction for distributing a controlled substance resulting in serious bodily injury. Matlock argued that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the heroin he supplied was a “but-for” cause of a friend’s overdose, pointing to the presence of other drugs and the timing of events. The court found that the jury had enough evidence to connect Matlock’s actions to the serious bodily injury sustained by Wiley, thus upholding the conviction. Judge Pryor authored the opinion. Judges Sykes and Hamilton concurred.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Cavallo Stable LLC and Aleksandra Karl v. Schwartz Boarding Farm LLC 
No. 25A-PL-3120

Appeal from the Adams Circuit Court, Judge Chad E. Kukelhan. The trial court issued a default judgment in favor of Schwartz Boarding Farm, LLC, awarding damages and attorney fees against Cavallo Stable, LLC and Aleksandra Karl. The Appellants contended that the judgment was void due to lack of personal jurisdiction, as they claimed they were never properly served with the summons and complaint. The court found that Schwartz failed to demonstrate adequate proof of service, concluding that the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction over the Appellants and reversing the denial of their motion for relief from judgment. Judge Mathias authored the opinion, with Judges Kenworthy and DeBoer concurring. Appellants’ attorney: Lucas M. Ainsworth, DeVoss, Baker, Ainsworth & Razo PC, Decatur. Appellee’s attorney: Clayton J. Lengerich, Miller, Burry & Brown PC, Decatur.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Coltin D. Herzog v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-3168

Appeal from the DeKalb Superior Court, Judge Patrick L. Jessup. Coltin Herzog was convicted of voluntary manslaughter after he stabbed Blake Boese during an attempt to recover stolen drugs from minors. The court found sufficient evidence to rebut Herzog’s self-defense claim, noting that Herzog chased Boese and initiated the violence. The appeals court also found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in identifying mitigating factors, concluding that the aggravating factors outweighed any mitigating evidence presented by Herzog, which included mental health issues. Additionally, Herzog’s 28-year sentence was deemed appropriate given the nature of the offense and his criminal history. Judge Felix authored the opinion, with Chief Judge Tavitas and Judge Bradford concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Justin R. Wall, Wall Legal Services, Huntington. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Nathan A. Floring v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-3189

Interlocutory appeal from the Johnson Superior Court, Judge Douglas B. Cummins. In this interlocutory appeal, Nathan Floring challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to dismiss charges for possession of methamphetamine and possession of paraphernalia, claiming immunity under Indiana’s Aaron’s Law. The court affirmed the trial court’s decision, stating Floring did not meet the statutory requirements for immunity, as he was not the individual who called for emergency assistance. Moreover, the court noted he failed to provide the necessary affidavits to support his assertions. Chief Judge Tavitas authored the opinion, with Judges Bradford and Felix concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Michael J. Kyle, Franklin. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Demontre Lamont Boyd v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-2071

Interlocutory appeal from the Clark Circuit Court, Judge Bradley B. Jacobs. In this interlocutory appeal, the court addressed whether the warrantless search of Boyd’s vehicle during a traffic stop violated his Fourth Amendment rights and Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution. The trial court had previously denied Boyd’s motion to suppress evidence found in his vehicle following a canine search. The court concluded that the canine search was unconstitutional, as the officers lacked probable cause prior to Officer Blitz entering the vehicle and that there was manipulation of circumstances by law enforcement to allow this entry, which constituted an unreasonable search. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded for proceedings consistent with its opinion. Judge Mathias authored the opinion, with Judges May and Felix concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Matthew J. McGovern, Fishers. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

The following opinion was issued on Aug. 3 following The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline. 

Indiana Tax Court
Chris M. & Paula J. Bolte v. Dubois County Assessor
No. 25T-TA-00026

The court affirms the Indiana Board of Tax Review’s final determination that raised the Boltes’ property assessments for 2023 and 2024. The Boltes raised numerous claims, including allegations of legal errors and constitutional violations, but the court found no error in the board’s decision or process. The Boltes did not demonstrate that the board acted arbitrarily, capriciously or contrary to law in accepting the assessor’s appraisal and rejecting their valuation. Judge McAdam authored the opinion. Petitioners appeared pro se. Respondent’s attorneys: Merilyn S. Meighen, Carmel, and Brian A. Cuismano, Indianapolis.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Hannah Janowiak v. Kenneth Sandage and The Trustees of Purdue University
No. 25A-CT-2937

Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge Kurt Eisgruber. The court affirmed the trial court’s decision, which dismissed Janowiak’s negligence claim against Sandhage and granted summary judgment for Purdue. Janowiak had initially sued Sandhage after being struck by his car, later amending her complaint to include Purdue as a defendant based on Sandhage’s admission that he was acting within the scope of his employment during the incident. However, the court ruled that Janowiak’s claims were barred under the Indiana Tort Claims Act due to her failure to provide timely notice of her claim to Purdue, which was required within 180 days of the injury. The court concluded that Janowiak did not substantially comply with this requirement and that Purdue was entitled to summary judgment. Judge Kenworthy authored the opinion, with Judges Bradford and Pyle concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Sarah Graziano, Hensley Legal Group PC, Fishers, Indiana. Attorneys for appellee Kenneth Sandage: John W. Mervilde and Kevin D. Lichtenberger, Schultz & Pogue LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana. Attorneys for the appellees Trustees of Purdue University: Barry L. Loftus and Danielle K. Fortin, Stuart & Branigin LLP, Lafayette, Indiana.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael K. Gregory v. State of Indiana, acting by and through its Indiana Department of Correction
No. 25A-MI-2460

Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge James A. Joven. Michael K. Gregory appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his complaint seeking indemnification from the state for a default judgment against former Indiana Department of Correction officer Courtney Woolfork. The court affirmed the dismissal, concluding that Indiana Code section 34-13-4-1 does not require indemnification because the state did not have an opportunity to defend Woolfork in the underlying federal civil rights action. Judge May authored the opinion with Judges Mathias and Felix concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: Christine Corso, Thomas E. Quinn and Casey L.M. Carlson, Jenner & Block LLP, Chicago, Illinois. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Gregory Brandon v. Caregan Transport Inc.
No. 25A-PL-2294

Appeal from the Wayne Superior Court, Judge Gregory Horn. The court reverses the trial court’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction over Gregory Brandon’s wage payment claim under the Wage Payment Statute. The court finds that the trial court erred in denying Brandon’s motion for summary judgment regarding his actual unpaid wages, ruling that he is entitled to $5,535.06 without a genuine issue of material fact. However, the court affirms the trial court’s denial of liquidated damages, as Brandon failed to demonstrate that Caregan acted in bad faith regarding those payments. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the appeals court’s decision. Judge DeBoer authored the opinion, with judges Mathias and Kenworthy concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Ronald E. Weldy, Weldy Law, Fishers, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: Andrew J. Sickmann, Boston Bever Forrest Cross & Sickmann, Richmond, Indiana.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Todd Rokita, Indiana Attorney General v. Berry Global Group, Inc., and Haitian Center of Evansville
No. 25A-MI-2817

Appeal from the Vanderburgh Superior Court, Judge Robert J. Pigman. The court affirms the trial court’s denial of the attorney general’s petitions to enforce civil investigative demands, or CIDs, against Berry Global Group and the Haitian Center of Evansville. The attorney general was unable to demonstrate a proper investigation, as he failed to establish reasonable cause to believe that either appellee possessed relevant information about labor trafficking or indecent nuisances. The opinion highlights that an investigation must have a factual predicate, such as a specific complaint or tip, rather than being based on general concerns. Judge Vaidik authored the opinion, with Judges Altice and Foley concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General. Attorneys for Berry Global Group Inc.: Kian J. Hudson and Amanda Jane Gallagher, Barnes & Thornburg LLP. Attorneys for Haitian Center of Evansville: Patrick A. Shoulders and John D. Langmaid IV, Ziemer Stayman Weitzel and Shoulders LLP, Evansville, Indiana.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

The following opinion was issued on July 23 after The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Brad Passwater v. Tricia Pretorius, et al.
No. 25-1149

Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Judge Matthew P. Brookman. Before Circuit Judges Ripple, Kirsch and Lee. The court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The court found that there was insufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to determine that Dr. Daniel Rippetoe and Deputy Warden Pretorius acted with deliberate indifference to Passwater’s serious medical needs under the Eighth Amendment. Judge Lee authored the opinion. There were no concurrences or dissents.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
USA v. Larry Darnell Doss 
No. 24-2138

Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Gretchen S. Lund. Before Circuit Judges Ripple, Hamilton and Pryor. Larry Darnell Doss pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, with a prior felony conviction for sexual battery under Indiana law. At sentencing, the district court enhanced Doss’s base offense level, classifying his prior conviction as a “crime of violence” under the sentencing guidelines. The court affirmed the sentence, concluding that Doss’s Indiana sexual battery conviction constituted a “forcible sex offense,” thereby qualifying as a “crime of violence” according to the guidelines. Judge Pryor authored the opinion. No concurrences or dissents were noted.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.