« Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals posts 15 NFP decisions today | Main | Ind. Courts - Jackson County family court in works »

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Ind. Decisions - More on: Court of Appeals posts 15 NFP decisions today

So, where's the list? Here it is. I've summarized the two civil NFPs. There were no "for publication" opinions issued today.

NFP criminal opinions (link to cases):

Shirley Shane v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert Burks v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Stephen Puckett v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Richard McClaine v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Charles Colbert v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Thomas G. Roberts v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Charles L. Wathen v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Michael Bridgeforth v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Charles Holton v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jeffrey L. Howard v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Timothy Dillow v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jason Tye Myers v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Eugene A. Nowak v. State of Indiana (NFP)

NFP civil opinions:

In Dale Raber v. Health & Hospital Corporation of Marion County, et al. (NFP), a 5-page opinion, Judge Mathias writes:

Dale Raber (“Raber”) appeals, pro se, the Marion Superior Court’s judgments against him in two separate actions, both stemming from environmental health code violations filed by the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County (“the Corporation”) pursuant to Indiana Code section 16-22-8-31(b).1 Concluding that Raber has failed to comply with various rules of appellate procedure, we dismiss his appeal. * * *

An appellant who proceeds pro se is “held to the same established rules of procedure that a trained legal counsel is bound to follow and, therefore, must be prepared to accept the consequences of his or her action.” * * *

Raber has failed to include these sections under separate headings in his appellate brief. It is impossible to discern where Raber’s facts, procedural history, and arguments begin and end, amounting to little more than a torrent of completely unfounded accusations. * * *

Failure to follow the appellate rules can, in egregious situations, lead to dismissal of the appeal. Kirchoff v. Selby, 703 N.E.2d 644, 656 (Ind. 1998). We regretfully conclude that Raber’s failure to comply with the appellate rules precludes review of his appeal. Dismissed.

In Marc Stults v. Anderson Police Department, et al. (NFP), an 8-page opinion, Judge Robb writes:
Marc Stults sought and was denied access to certain records by the Anderson City Attorney on behalf of the Chief of Police of the Anderson Police Department (collectively referred to as “Anderson PD”). Stults filed a complaint against Anderson PD seeking to compel access to the records. The trial court granted summary judgment to Anderson PD, and Stults now appeals, raising two issues that we consolidate as one: whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment. We affirm. * * *

The trial court was not precluded from granting summary judgment even though discovery was pending because of Stults’ failure to timely respond to Anderson PD’s motion for summary judgment. The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to Anderson PD because the records Stults was seeking were investigatory records, access to which could be denied in the agency’s discretion. The trial court’s judgment is affirmed. Affirmed.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 23, 2006 02:41 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions