Court opinions

Indiana Court of Appeals
Ryan Gordon Tracy v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
20A-CR-2052
Criminal. Affirms Ryan Tracy’s conviction of three counts of child molesting as a Level 1 felony and one count of child molesting as a Level 4 felony, and his aggregate 40-year sentence. Finds a nurse’s training and education qualified her as an expert with regard to sexual assault examinations, and the Shelby Superior Court didn’t abuse its discretion in allowing her expert testimony. Also finds Tracy’s sentence is not inappropriate.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Termination: W.S. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
21A-JT-00509
Juvenile termination. Affirm the termination of W.S.’s parental rights to his son, J.S. Finds Father’s incarceration was only one of the reasons for termination. Finds that termination was not clearly erroneous.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Taylor Jones v. G.H., by next friend, K.H.
21A-PO-555
Protective order. Affirms a grant of an order for protection to G.H. by his next friend and father, K.H., against Taylor Jones. Finds sufficient evidence to support the protection order.

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals  

Kirk Jones v. Kevin Ramos 
20-2017
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division. Judge Damon R. Leichty. Civil. Affirms the Northern District Court’s dismissal of Kirk Jones’ personal injury case without prejudice for failure to timely serve the summons and complaint on the defendants, including Kevin Ramos. Finds Jones had filed the suit only two days short of the limitations period, and therefore the ruling effectively ended the litigation. Finds the district court did not abuse its discretion when it reasonably applied prevailing 7th Circuit law.

Indiana Supreme Court
Jesse R. Bunnell v. State of Indiana
21S-CR-139
Criminal. Affirms the denial of Jesse Bunnell’s motion to suppress in his marijuana case. On an issue of first impression, finds that an officer who affirms that they detect the odor of raw marijuana based on their training and experience may establish probable cause without providing further details on their qualifications to recognize this odor. Justice Christopher Goff concurs in result without separate opinion. Justice Mark Massa concurs with separate opinion.

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Sydney Renner v. Trevor J. Shepard-Bazant
21S-CT-138
Civil tort. Affirms the Lake Superior Court’s decision to reduces its damages award for Sydney Renner based on Renner’s failure to mitigate her damages and failure to show that an accident involving Trevor Shepard-Bazant cause all of her damages. Finds that the trial court permissibly weighed the evidence before it to determine that Renner’s post-accident conduct did cause her harm. Also finds the trial court inadequately addressed the eggshell-skill rule and treated Renner’s prior injuries as separate incidents. Finally, finds the trial court abused its discretion in calculating damages. Remands to the trial court to take the eggshell-skull rule into account and recalculate damages.

Indiana Supreme Court
Teresa Blackford v. Welborn Clinic
21S-CT-85
Civil tort. Affirms the grant of summary judgment to the Welborn Clinic and the denial of Teresa Blackford’s motion for partial summary judgment. Finds the Indiana Business Trust Act’s limitation period is a statute of repose, so fraudulent concealment may not extend the time in which to file a claim. Also finds that even if the limitation period were subject to tolling, a tortfeasor’s constructive fraud precludes equitable relief. Finally, finds Blackford’s claim was untimely.

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals
Chad E. Mathis v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a.k.a. METLIFE, et al.,
20-2719
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge James R. Sweeney II.
Civil. Affirms the Indiana Southern District Court’s dismissal of Dr. Chad Mathis’ negligent-procurement claim with prejudice and the grant of summary judgment to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, MetLife, on most his breach-of-contract claim. Finds the district judge committed no error in disposing of Mathis’s claims.

The following Indiana Supreme Court decision was posted after IL deadline on Thursday.

Muir Woods Section One Association, Inc., Muir Woods, Inc., Spruce Knoll Homeowners Association, Inc., and Oakmont Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Marion County Assessor, Joseph P. O’Connor
21S-TA-158
On petition for review from the Indiana Tax Court. Reverses in part, summarily affirms in part, and remands to the Board of Tax Review for further proceedings. Finds Form 133 filed by Muir Woods Section One Association, Inc., Muir Woods, Inc., Spruce Knoll Homeowners Association, Inc., and Oakmont Homeowners Association, Inc was a proper avenue to challenge the application of a discount to common land within the HOAs’ property. Reverses Section 2 of the Indiana Tax Court’s opinion and summarily affirms the remainder of its decision. Remands.

The following 7^th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Wednesday:

Jose Andrade v. City of Hammond, Indiana, et al.
20-1541
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division. Senior Judge Theresa L. Springmann.

Civil. Reverses the dismissal of Jose Andrade’s federal complaint against the City of Hammond, the Hammond Board of Public Works and Safety and several Hammond employees. Finds Rooker-Feldman does not bar federal-court jurisdiction because Andrade’s claims concern the defendants’ actions separate from any state-court judgment. Remands for further proceedings. Chief Judge Diane Sykes concurs with separate opinion.

Indiana Court of Appeals
James M. Prater, III v. Harris & Sons Landscaping, LLC
21A-SC-7
Small claims. Affirms the Marion County Small Claims Court’s award of damages and attorney fees following its judgment for James M. Prater III on his claim against Harris & Sons Landscaping LLC. Finds Prater has not shown that the $300 attorney fee award is either contrary to the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the small claims court or that it misinterpreted the law.