A woman who failed to report part-time income on her unemployment applications didn’t get an excessive sanction when she was required to repay $11,190 to the state, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.
Ashton L. Geimer v. Donald Braun, et al. (mem. dec.)
22A-CC-2680
Civil collections. Affirms the negative judgment against Ashton Geimer on her counterclaim against Donald and Linda Braun for trespass to personal property. Finds the judgment denying Geimer’s counterclaim is not clearly erroneous. Declines to award additional appellate attorney fees.
The Indiana Supreme Court is set to hear two oral arguments next week involving a wind turbine access dispute and a challenge to an adoption proceeding.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
Andrea Armour v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-2407
Criminal. Affirms the revocation of Andrea Armour’s probation. Finds the Hendricks Circuit Court did not abuse its discretion.
The U.S. Supreme Court says New Jersey can withdraw from a commission created decades ago with New York to combat the mob’s influence at their joint port.
The Supreme Court is allowing challenges to the structure of two federal agencies to go forward in federal court.
The failure of two property owners to receive any of the multiple notices sent to them regarding the tax sale of their property did not create an “exceptional” case warranting the setting aside of the tax deed, the Court of Appeals of Indiana has ruled.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
Marion Assets 2020, LLC v. Fiascone Family LP
22A-TP-1681
Verified petition for issuance of a tax deed. Affirms the Lake Superior Court’s conclusion that Marion Assets 2020 LLC provided Fiascone Family LP with constitutionally adequate notice in obtaining a tax deed. Reverses the trial court’s conclusion to set aside the tax deed on equitable grounds. Finds the trial court did not err when it found that Marion Assets provided Fiascone Family with constitutionally adequate notice, but did abuse its discretion when it set aside the tax deed on equitable grounds. Remands with instructions for the court to deny Fiascone Family’s motion to set aside the tax deed.
A landlord whose tenant’s pit bulls bit a mail carrier isn’t liable for damages, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled in affirming a trial court’s summary judgment ruling.
Town of Clayton v. Michael Swanson and Evi Swanson (mem. dec.)
22A-CT-1061
Civil tort. Affirms and reverses in part the judgment in favor of Michael and Evi Swanson on their claim against the town of Clayton alleging inverse condemnation of real property. Finds the Hendricks Superior Court did not err when it denied the town’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of damages within the drainage easement, but did err when it denied the town’s motion for partial summary judgment on the Swansons’ claims alleging vicarious liability for Murrain Excavating Inc.’s negligence. Also finds the trial court’s findings regarding the Swansons’ inverse condemnation claim are supported by the evidence and are sufficient to show a taking.
A man challenging his child molesting convictions and 41-year sentence found no relief at the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
Ray Sorgdrager v. State of Indiana
22A-CR-01175
Criminal. Affirms Ray Sorgdrager’s sentence for two counts of child molesting, one as a Level 1 felony and the other as a Level 4 felony, and his 41-year sentence in the Department of Correction. Finds sufficient evidence to support the Level 1 felony conviction. Also finds Sorgdrager failed to establish that either of his offenses is included in the other, either inherently or factually, so he has not established that his convictions constitute double jeopardy. Finally, finds Sorgdrager has not sustained his burden of establishing that his aggregate sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offenses and his character. Judge Elaine Brown concurs and dissents in part with separate opinion.
An appeals court ruled that mifepristone can be used but reduced the period of pregnancy when the drug can be taken and said it could not be dispensed by mail. The Justice Department said it will ask the Supreme Court for an order to put any action on hold.
An oil company sued by the widow of a man who died using its product established affirmative defenses against liability and should have been granted summary judgment, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled in reversing a lower court’s decision.
An Evansville car dealer is entitled to summary judgment in an accidental death case in which a man’s widow claimed negligence, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled in reversing and remanding the denial of summary judgment.
Darrell Scott Durham v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-872
Criminal. Affirms Darrell S. Durham’s convictions of Level 4 felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, Level 5 felony domestic battery by means of a deadly weapon, Level 6 felony domestic battery and Level 6 felony pointing a firearm, and his nine-year sentence. Finds the admission of Exhibit 24, a no-contact order, was, at most, harmless error. Also finds the state’s closing arguments did not amount to fundamental error. Finally, finds the Marion Superior Court relied on proper aggravators in sentencing Durham.
Read Indiana appellate court decisions from the most recent reporting period.
Juan Jose Santoyo Escamilla v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-2264
Criminal. Affirms Juan Escamilla’s convictions of possession of methamphetamine, operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance, possession of drug paraphernalia and driving without a license. Finds the traffic stop violated neither the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution nor Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.
Michael Damien Howell v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-PC-01659
Post-conviction relief petition. Affirms the post-conviction relief court’s denial of Michael Damien Howell’s petition. Finds Howell has not shown that his trial counsel’s error prejudiced him.
A federal magistrate judge has denied Purdue University’s motion for judgment or a new trial following a jury verdict in favor of a former student who accused the school of violating her Title IX rights for reporting a sexual assault.