Appeals court grants rehearing petition for Miranda clarification
A man convicted for two counts of murder had his petition for rehearing granted Friday, but solely for an appellate panel to clarify its factual recitation of his Miranda waiver.
A man convicted for two counts of murder had his petition for rehearing granted Friday, but solely for an appellate panel to clarify its factual recitation of his Miranda waiver.
Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re the Paternity of J.G.; Wendy Sonora Hernandez and Margarito Guzman v. Fredy Sanchez Cortes and State of Indiana
19A-JP-2429
Juvenile paternity. Affirms the denial in Elkhart Superior Court of Wendy Sonora Hernandez’s motion for summary judgment on the state’s action seeking to establish paternity of her child by Fredy Sanchez Cortez. Finds the trial court did not err in its denial, and that mother and husband, Margarito Guzman, have failed to meet their burden on appeal to demonstrate that the court abused its discretion when it dismissed husband as a party to the action. Also finds that mother has failed to demonstrate that she was prejudiced by the trial court’s failure to provide her with explicit notice of its intent to treat her motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment. Lastly, holds that the state timely filed its paternity petition and that putative father was not required to register with the putative father registry before the state could file its petition.
The Indiana Court of Appeals on Thursday affirmed the grant of a mother’s request for a garnishment order to enforce an earlier order requiring her ex-husband to pay part of their daughter’s college tuition fees.
A mother contesting a paternity petition concerning her child could not convince the Indiana Court of Appeals on Thursday that her motion for summary judgment was wrongly denied.
The coronavirus pandemic has kept justices of the United States Supreme Court from their courtroom since March and forced them to change their ways in many respects. Now, in their season of weighty decisions, instead of the drama that can accompany the announcement of a majority decision and its biting dissent, the court’s opinions are being posted online without an opportunity for the justices to be heard.
Indiana Court of Appeals
David E Killian v. State of Indiana
19A-CR-02628
Criminal. Affirms David Killian’s conviction of sexual misconduct with a minor. Finds that because sexual misconduct with a minor over 20 ago could not have been the source of the pregnancy, the Kosciusko Superior Court properly excluded evidence that Killian’s son could have been the “source” of the victim’s pregnancy. Finds Evidence Rule 412(b)(1)(A) does not allow for this speculation.
The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinions were posted after IL deadline Monday:
USA v. Carlos Maez, USA v. Matthew Jones, USA v. Cameron Battiste
19-1287, 19-1768, 19-2049
USA v. Maez is an appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division. Judge Jon DeGuilio.
Criminal. Affirms judgment of the Northern District Court against Carlos Maez in United States v. Maez, 19‐1287. Affirms Matthew Jones’ conviction in United States v. Jones, 19‐1768, vacates his sentence and remands the case to the district court for resentencing. After applying plain‐error review, concludes that the asserted errors do not require reversing any of the convictions, but vacates Jones’ sentence because the district court made a Tapia error. Also affirms Cameron Battiste’s conviction in United States v. Battiste, 19‐2049.
In what it called its first precedential decision concerning convictions upon jury verdicts in federal firearms cases after a key US Supreme Court decision, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the convictions of three men who argued that their indictments and jury instructions were missing an element.
A divided panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated a sales commission dispute, though the dissenting judge would hold that the Northern District of Indiana’s grant of summary judgment was proper.
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Logan Owsley v. Mark Gorbett
19-1825
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Vacates dismissal of Logan Owsley’s federal lawsuit contending that the Bartholomew County Sheriff and his deputies have lost or destroyed evidence that would help his late father’s estate pursue claims against who Logan claims are Cary’s putative murderers. Finds the district court properly recognized that the state court’s decision to retain Lisa Owsley as the estate’s representative is not subject to collateral attack. Finds a first issue on remand to determine is whether an access-to-courts claim can be based on an assertion that the defendants concealed or destroyed evidence that could have been relevant, had suit been filed in state court.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated dismissal of a federal estate lawsuit and remanded a case brought by a Bartholomew County man who claims his father’s wife and her children murdered his father.
The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the oversight board established by Congress to help Puerto Rico out of a devastating financial crisis that has been exacerbated by the coronavirus outbreak, recent earthquakes and damage from Hurricane Maria in 2017. The justices reversed a lower court ruling that threatened to throw the island’s recovery efforts into chaos.
A divided Supreme Court on Friday rejected an emergency appeal by a California church that challenged state limits on attendance at worship services that have been imposed to contain the spread of the coronavirus.
Indiana Supreme Court
River Ridge Development Authority v. Outfront Media, LLC, David Watkins, No Moore, Inc., the Schlosser Family Limited Partnership, the Town of Utica, and the Utica Board of Zoning Appeals
19S-PL-645
Civil plenary. Reverses the Clark Circuit Court’s award of $237,440.63 in attorney fees to Outfront Media, LLC, David Watkins, No Moore, Inc., the Schlosser Family Limited Partnership, the Town of Utica, and the Utica Board of Zoning Appeals. Holds that the trial court’s decision was an abuse of discretion. Neither the common-law obdurate behavior exception nor the General Recovery Rule — both of which require a “prevailing party” — allow an award of attorney fees when a party voluntarily dismisses its complaint, as River Ridge did. The record also lacks evidence to show that River Ridge litigated in bad faith and that its conduct was calculatedly oppressive, obdurate, or obstreperous.
The Indiana Court of Appeals has again rejected a Monroe County resident’s requested preliminary injunction that would prevent logging from taking place on land near his home.
The Indiana Supreme Court on Friday threw out an award of more than $237,000 in attorney fees in a lawsuit over seven billboards outside Utica, Indiana. Justices found the Clark Circuit Court lacked a basis for awarding fees to the parties who sued a regional development entity that sought to restrict billboards along State Road 265 just north of Louisville.
A former environmental chemist who was fired from his longstanding position at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management could not convince a panel of the Indiana Court of Appeals that he was terminated for being a whistleblower.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Universal Auto, LLC, d/b/a James Myers v. Cory Murray
19A-PL-1225
Civil plenary. Affirms the Marion Superior Court’s entry of judgment in Cory Murray’s favor on his contract claim for damages and Universal Auto LLC’s counterclaim for damages and attorney’s fees. Finds Murray had not defaulted on the sales contract when Universal repossessed his vehicle. Also finds that Universal failed to carry its burden of demonstrating prima facie error concerning its counterclaim and Murray’s contract claim.
An auto dealer couldn’t sway an appellate court’s ruling for one of the dealer’s customers after the court found the man who immediately had problems with the vehicle hadn’t defaulted on his sales contract because payment was not due.
Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re the Supervised Estate of Dorothy M. Hall (Decedent), Doloris Tilly v. Jeff Hall and Doris Andres
19A-ES-1450
Estate. Affirms the Floyd Circuit Court’s April 26, 2019 interlocutory order in the supervised estate of Dorothy M. Hall. Finds reversal is not warranted on Doloris Tilly’s argument that her stepbrother Jeff Hall’s affidavits were improperly considered by the trial court. Also finds no abuse of its discretion in denying her request to strike Hall’s responses to her request for admissions. Lastly, finds that Ind. Code § 29-1-14-1 does not require reversal and that Hall was not required to file a separate request to set aside the March 2010 deeds or join stepsister Doris Andres’s petition.