Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowCourt of Appeals of Indiana
Tiffance Fields v. Constance Gaw
22A-CT-2687
Civil tort. Affirms the grant of summary judgment in favor of Constance Gaw in a dispute with Tiffance Fields. Finds no genuine issue of material fact exists precluding summary judgment as to whether Gaw was an “owner” of the dogs at issue pursuant to the Dog Bite Statute.
Bradley Cooley v. Shelly Cooley
22A-DN-1202
Domestic relations no children. Affirms and reverses in part the decree of dissolution of the marriage of Bradley and Shelly Cooley. Finds the portion of the decree requiring Bradley to obtain and subsidize a life insurance policy naming Shelly as the owner and beneficiary violates Indiana Code § 31-15-7-4 and thus reverses that part of the decree with respect to payment of the life insurance premiums. Also finds Bradley did not preserve for appellate review the issue of whether the Morgan Superior Court abused its discretion when it did not consider the tax consequences he will incur when he starts to draw on his pension and pays Shelly one-half of those benefits. Remands for the trial court to determine the cost of the life insurance premiums in light of Bradley’s life expectancy, then include the total projected cost of the life insurance policy in the marital estate as security for the marital asset of Bradley’s pension and recalculate the equalization payment to Shelly so that Bradley and Shelly share the cost of the security equally.
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.
Rita M. Tafelski v. M & K Truck Centers of Gary, LLC (mem. dec.)
22A-CT-2167
Civil tort. Affirms the grant of summary judgment in favor of M&K Truck Centers of Gary LLC on Rita Tafelski’s claim to set aside a fraudulent conveyance. Finds the designated evidence demonstrates that M&K was a good faith purchaser who obtained the assets of Pozzo for a reasonably equivalent value, so the sale of Pozzo’s assets to M&K is not voidable and the trial court did not err when it entered summary judgment in favor of M&K under the Indiana Uniform Fraudulent Transactions Act.
William Scott Carson v. Dana Leigh Carson (mem. dec.)
22A-DC-674
Domestic relations with children. Affirms the Monroe Circuit Court’s orders in a dissolution action between William and Dana Carson. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered William to pay Dana caregiver spousal maintenance and attorney fees.
Cary B. Buroff, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-2446
Criminal. Affirms Cary B. Buroff Jr.’s aggregate 25-year sentence for Level 4 felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and a habitual offender enhancement. Finds Buroff’s sentence is not inappropriate.
David Roman Winters v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-1676
Criminal. Affirms David Roman Winters’ conviction of Level 6 felony criminal recklessness while armed with a deadly weapon. Finds the evidence was sufficient.
Ronell L. Roberts v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-PC-688
Post-conviction. Affirms the denial of Ronell L. Roberts’ petition for post-conviction relief. Finds Roberts has waived his freestanding claims. Also finds Roberts has not offered strong and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption that his trial or appellate counsel’s performance in investigating and preparing for his case was effective. Finally, finds Roberts has not overcome the strong presumption of adequate assistance or demonstrated that the evidence as a whole unerringly and unmistakably leads to a conclusion opposite that reached by the post-conviction court.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.