Opinions July 26, 2022

Keywords Opinions
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Lelah Jerger, et al. v. Shannon Blaize, et al.
21-3011
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division. Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Vacates the entry of summary judgment in favor of caseworkers for the Indiana Department of Child Services, who were sued for alleged violations of Fourth and 14th Amendment rights based on their actions in a case involving Lelah and Jade Jerger and their child, J.J. Finds the Jergers have done enough to create a jury question on whether the DCS defendants violated their and J.J.’s constitutional rights. Also finds neither summary judgment nor qualified immunity is available where the parties dispute facts material to the consent question. Remands.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Inspire Outdoor Living v. Christopher Norris, et al.
22A-PL-641
Civil plenary. Reverses the order granting the motion for relief from default judgment filed by Christopher Norris, et al., in a dispute with Inspire Outdoor Living. Finds IOL presented a case of prima facie error in the Hamilton Superior Court’s order granting Norris’ motion to set aside judgment and vacating that judgment. Remands for further proceedings. 

Wesley Willis v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
21A-PC-2346
Post-conviction. Affirms the denial of Wesley Willis’ petition for post-conviction relief following his convictions of voluntary manslaughter and attempted murder. Finds Willis has failed to establish that his trial counsel was ineffective in submitting an instruction on voluntary manslaughter or in not submitting an instruction on attempted voluntary manslaughter.

Deborah L. Wehrheim v. James C. Lake (mem. dec.)
21A-DR-2738
Domestic relations. Affirms a post-dissolution order finding Deborah Wehrheim in contempt of court for failing to pay college expenses of her child with James Lake and ordering that she pay $750 of Lake’s attorney fees. Finds Wehrheim failed to demonstrate that the Clark Circuit Court abused its discretion.

Jo Ann Lance v. Mark A. Lance (mem. dec.)
21A-PL-2872
Civil plenary. Reverses the judgment in favor of Mark Lance and the order for his aunt, Jo Ann Lance, to execute and deliver a general warranty deed for 2.5 acres of her vacant farmland to him and to pay his attorney fees. Finds the statute of frauds precludes Mark’s claim. Also finds the parties’ oral agreement for the sale of Jo Ann’s land is unenforceable, so the Warrick Superior Court’s order of specific performance is clearly erroneous. Finally, finds Mark is not, and never should have been, a prevailing party in the case, so an award of fees to him is unwarranted. Remands to the trial court for further proceedings to address the minimal restitution, if any, due to Mark to prevent injustice as a result of the unenforceable oral agreement.

Lyda Annmarie Bullard v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-87
Criminal. Affirms Lyda Annmarie Bullard’s convictions for Level 4 felony sexual misconduct with a minor and Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy and her sentence to an aggregate of six years, with three years executed. Finds the Shelby Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of sexual misconduct or in instructing the jury. Also finds the state presented sufficient evidence to support the conviction of sexual misconduct with a minor. Finally, finds Bullard’s sentence was not inappropriate.

Samuel Houston v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-290
Criminal. Affirms the revocation of Samuel Houston’s probation and the order that he serve the remaining balance of his previously suspended sentence in the Indiana Department of Correction. Finds the Warren Circuit Court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the state to ask Houston’s wife leading questions during the factfinding hearing on the state’s petition to revoke Houston’s probation.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}