Opinions

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Cory Chapman v. State of Indiana
21A-CR-421
Criminal. Affirms the Greene Superior Court’s preliminary determination that memes involving jokes of a sexual nature Cory Chapman allegedly disseminated to a former student via text message are probably harmful to minors. Finds the applicability of Indiana Code Section 35-49-2-4 cannot be entirely ruled out as a procedure for litigating such cases as this. Also finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its final determination. Finally, finds Chapman waived his constitutional challenge. Judge Paul Mathias concurs with separate opinion and Judge Margret Robb dissents with separate opinion.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Harry Richard Wellings, Jr. v. State of Indiana
21A-CR-1874
Criminal. Affirms Harry Richard Wellings Jr.’s aggregate 12-year sentence for his convictions of Level 3 felony attempted rape, Level 4 felony criminal confinement, Level 5 felony attempted incest, Level 6 felony sexual battery and Level 6 felony strangulation. Finds Wellings has failed to show that his sentence is inappropriate.

Brent A. Taylor v. Tom Antisdel, et. al.
21A-CT-1934
Civil tort. Affirms the Allen Superior Court’s dismissal of a defamation lawsuit filed by Brent A. Taylor against multiple local news outlets. Finds the trial court didn’t err in in dismissing the lawsuit. Also finds the statements Taylor alleged were defamatory were a matter of public concern, and he didn’t allege any facts tending to show the outlets reported with actual malice, as they did not report on anything other than the information contained in court documents and police records. Finally, finds that even if a false statement was published, Taylor cannot establish sufficient proof to permit the conclusion that the outlets entertained “serious doubts” as to the truth of their publications or that there was a “high degree of awareness that the statements were probably false.”

Court of Appeals of Indiana
In re the Matter of the Adoption of I.B., A.B. (Father) v. B.B. (Stepfather)
21A-AD-1792
Adoption. Reverses the order granting stepfather B.B.’s petition to adopt I.B. Finds the St. Joseph Probate Court erred when it found father A.B. had not communicated significantly with I.B. for one year prior to the filing of B.B.’s petition to adopt I.B. because mother S.B. thwarted A.B.’s attempts to communicate with I.B. Also finds A.B.’s consent was required for B.B. to adopt I.B.

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals
Ashaki Paschall and Gerald Ragland v. Tube Processing Corporation
21-1853
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson.
Civil. Affirms the Southern District Court’s conclusion that Ashaki Paschall and Gerald Ragland did not produce sufficient evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could conclude that they satisfied all the elements of their sexual harassment and racial discrimination claims brought against their former employer, Tube Processing Corporation.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Nathan C. Albrecht v. State of Indiana
21A-CR-1560
Criminal. Affirms Nathan C. Albrecht’s 10 counts of Level 5 felony possession of child pornography and 21-year sentencing. Finds Dubois Circuit Court didn’t err in admitting evidence taken off a hard drive in Albrecht’s home. Concludes his convictions are supported by the evidence. Judge Terry A. Crone concurs in part and dissents in part in separate opinion.

Indiana Supreme Court
Service Steel Warehouse Co., L.P. v. United States Steel Corp.
21S-CC-408
Civil collections. Reverses the Lake Superior Court’s entry of summary judgment for United States Steel Corp. after Service Steel Warehouse Co. L.P. sued to foreclose on a mechanic’s lien. Finds Service Steel, as a supplier, could have a lien because it furnished materials for a project, which is all the mechanic’s lien statute required. Remands for reconsideration of Service Steel’s summary judgment motion.

Indiana Supreme Court
Solarize Indiana, Inc. v. Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Co., d/b/a Vectren Energy Delivery of Indiana, Inc., et al.
21S-EX-236
Agency action. Dismisses Solarize Indiana Inc.’s appeal seeking judicial review of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission’s order approving two filings submitted by Vectren Energy Delivery of Indiana Inc. under an expedited process known as the Thirty-Day Rule. Finds Solarize has not shown that it was adversely affected by the IURC order, so it lacks standing. Justice Geoffrey Slaughter concurs in part and in the judgment with separate opinion.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
REO Holdings Series 3, LLC v. Angela Trowbridge and Mark Trowbridge, and Elizabeth Klapper and Stephen R. Klapper (mem. dec.)
21A-PL-1165
Civil plenary. Affirms Angela and Mark Trowbridge’s granted motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by REO Holdings Series 3, LLC alleging breach of contract when the Trowbridges proceeded to attempt to convey their property to Elizabeth and Stephen Klapper when an REO representative failed to appear during closing. Finds that REO failed to allege any grounds in its complaint upon which it could prevail and that the trial court did not err in granting the Trowbidges’ motion to dismiss.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
James Louis Warren v. State of Indiana
21A-CR-247
Criminal. Affirms James Warren’s convictions for level 2 felony dealing in methamphetamine, Level 6 felony possession of a controlled substance while in possession of a firearm and Level 6 felony maintaining a common nuisance but vacates the Howard Superior Court’s sentencing order. Finds any error in the admission of evidence was harmless. Also finds the trial court erred by denying Warren’s request to exercise his right to be physically present during his sentencing hearing. Remands with instructions for the trial court to hold a sentencing hearing where Warren is physically present.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Robert D. Willis and Cindy L. Willis v. Dilden Brothers, Inc.
21A-CT-378
Civil tort. Affirms and reverses in part the Tippecanoe Superior Court’s various rulings in a dispute between Robert D. and Cindy L. Willis and Dilden Brothers Inc. Summarily affirms the verdict and final damages award on Count 1, as Dilden does not challenge them. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Dilden’s motion to correct error as to Count 2 or in awarding damages for an incurable deceptive act as to Robert on Count 3, but did abuse its discretion in awarding damages for an uncured deceptive act as to Cindy. Also finds the trial court abused its discretion in impeaching the jury’s verdict on Count 4 based on a juror’s comment about attorney fees but did not abuse its discretion in reducing the award to $15,000. Finally, finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Willises’ motion for recusal or in determining the amount of the attorney fees award. Judge L. Mark Bailey concurs and dissents in part with separate opinion.