7th Circuit upholds denial of motion to suppress gun evidence
The denial of a man’s motion to suppress evidence of a gun that resulted in his firearm conviction will stand, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday.
The denial of a man’s motion to suppress evidence of a gun that resulted in his firearm conviction will stand, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday.
The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Brenda L. Wilder v. Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security
21-1607
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division. Judge Joseph S. Van Bokkelen.
Civil. Affirms the Northern Indiana District Court’s order upholding the denial of Social Security disability benefits to Brenda Wilder. Finds the administrative law judge did not err in not considering whether Wilder met or equaled Listing 11.17(a), or when it didn’t request the opinion of a medical expert. Also finds the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence.
A bill that would remove a state law requiring drivers to initiate their turn signals at certain distances before turning or switching lanes has started down the Indiana legislative road.
An Indiana woman will not receive Social Security disability benefits after the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed her ailments don’t limit her from, at a minimum, sedentary work.
Despite having concerns about the continued viability of a 1985 Indiana Supreme Court decision, the Court of Appeals of Indiana upheld the denial of a defendant’s motion to compel evidence of unredacted copies of police reports based on that precedent.
A Northern Indiana District Court judge who sentenced a defendant to the maximum will have to go back for a do-over after the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the prison term because of procedural errors that could not be deemed harmless.
The Indiana Supreme Court is scheduled to kick off the new year with two oral arguments on the schedule.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Kim M. Lloyd v. Lawrence Kuznar and Trustees of Purdue University
21A-CT-1338
Civil tort. Affirms the Allen Superior Court’s denial of Kim Lloyd’s Trial Rule 60(B) motion to the extent it sought to set aside the dismissal of her complaint against Lawrence Kuznar and Trustees of Purdue University. Finds Lloyd cannot revive her claims because she stopped participating in the litigation and failed to keep the trial court apprised of her address, which resulted in their dismissal. Finds the trial court erred in denying Lloyd’s Trial Rule 60(B) motion with respect to the default judgment entered against her on Kuznar’s counterclaim and reverses on that portion. Remands for further proceedings.
The following opinions were posted after IL deadline on Wednesday:
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Brooke Persinger v. Southwest Credit Systems, L.P.
21-1037
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Affirms the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Southwest Credit Systems L.P. in a dispute with Brooke Persinger. Finds Southwest’s compliance procedures were reasonable and thus met the Fair Credit Reporting Act requirements. Also finds the evidence shows that Southwest had a reasonable basis for relying on its procedures and that summary judgment for Southwest was appropriate because no reasonable juror could conclude that the inquiry into Persinger’s propensity‐to‐pay score resulted in actual damages.
A collections company’s compliance procedures were reasonable and met the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act in its pursuit of collecting from an Indiana woman, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.
A petition to transfer in a dispute over the removal of highway billboards split the Indiana Supreme Court but did not gain enough votes to be heard by the justices.
An Indianapolis man who described his offenses as “being in a truck with drugs and a gun” was unable to get his sentence reduced after the Court of Appeals of Indiana rejected his argument that his six-year enhancement for being a habitual offender was an impermissible double enhancement.
A construction worker injured in a building collapse was, in fact, an independent contractor, the Court of Appeals of Indiana has concluded, rejecting an earlier finding that the worker was actually an employee of the company he sued.
An Indianapolis man will not have his charge of unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon dropped, as the Court of Appeals of Indiana affirmed his constitutional rights weren’t infringed upon when the state applied Indiana Code § 35-47-4-5 to his case.
Read Indiana appellate court decisions from the most recent reporting period.
Court of Appeals of Indiana
In the Matter of the Power of Attorney of Darlene DeHart, Jeff DeHart v. Darlene DeHart
21A-GM-1043
Guardianship, miscellaneous. Affirms the Johnson Superior Court’s denial of a petition by Jeff DeHart to release an accounting of his mother, Darlene’s, finances. Finds the order is in the best interests of Darlene. Also finds the trial court erred in having Jeff bear the burden of proof instead of Darlene, but holds it harmless. Finally, finds Darlene was competent in appointing her daughter, Christine, as attorney-in-fact, and she is entitled to privacy in the management of her finances.
A Greenwood man will not obtain an accounting of his mother’s finances, as the Court of Appeals of Indiana has affirmed it is in the best interest of the woman that those details stay between her and the daughter she named as her guardian.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana has tossed a postadoption visitation order for a maternal grandmother, finding the Jennings Superior Court abused its discretion by ignoring the requirements and, in part, ordering contact four years after the adoption was completed.
A doctor who wasn’t notified of a lawsuit against him until one year after it was filed must face the lawsuit after the Court of Appeals of Indiana reversed its dismissal.
A man serving as personal representative of his brother’s estate has failed to convince the Court of Appeals of Indiana that the language in a will left by his deceased brother created a valid trust in his name.