« Court - Justice Scalia debates ACLU president - available on C-Span | Main | Ind. Courts - Jill behrman trial begins today in Martinsville: secrecy remains an issue »

Monday, October 16, 2006

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 11 NFP)

For publication opinions today (2):

In Harold Galloway v. Kathryn Galloway, a 7-page opinion, Chief Judge Kirsch writes:

Harold Galloway (“Harold”) appeals the trial court’s property distribution in his dissolution of marriage to Kathryn Galloway (“Kathryn”), raising one issue that we restate as: whether the trial court’s divorce decree (“Decree”), which awarded Kathryn’s unvalued pension to her in its entirety, was an abuse of discretion. * * *

Here, the trial court was presented with no competent evidence of the estate’s only two sizable assets, namely a twelve-year-old business and a likely significant pension. Having failed to introduce evidence of the value of these assets, Harold is estopped from appealing the trial court’s distribution. The trial court’s Decree, including its division of personal property, is affirmed in all respects.

In Corey Mills v. State of Indiana, a 10-page opinion, Judge Barnes writes:
[Issue] whether Mills received ineffective assistance of counsel before pleading guilty, which caused his plea to be unknowing, unintelligent, and involuntary. * * * The post-conviction court correctly denied Mills’s PCR petition because he failed to establish that trial counsel misadvised him as to the maximum possible punishment he faced. We affirm.
NFP civil opinions today (5):

Hall Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Schaumburg Audi v. Ronald L. Baker, M.D. and Deanne M. Baker (NFP)

Joseph E. Carter, Jr., and Sarah E. Ammons v. Valley Rural Electric Co. (NFP) - "The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying Carter and Ammons’s request for an extension of time. We affirm."

James Bedree and Joseph Yovanovitch v. O'Daniel Ford, Inc. (NFP) - "[W]e find that the trial court properly dismissed Appellants’ Complaint based on the doctrine of res judicata because Yovanovitch was a party in the First Lawsuit which was dismissed with prejudice."

Aaron Robinson v. Sean Lucas (NFP) - "[W]e affirm the trial court’s denial of Stepfather’s petition for adoption of H.C.L."

Gerald L. Whalen v. Eddie Rohe and Patricia Rohe (NFP) - "Whalen argues in his reply brief that the trial court erred when it found that his remedies at law were adequate. However, because Whalen raised this issue for the first time in his reply brief, it is waived. See, e.g., Felsher v. University of Evansville, 755 N.E.2d 589, 593 n.6 (Ind. 2001) (holding that an argument was waived because it was raised for the first time in the reply brief); see also Ind. App. R. 46(C) (“No new issues shall be raised in the reply brief.”). As a result of the waiver, Whalen has failed to demonstrate that the trial court’s denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction is clearly erroneous."

NFP criminal opinions today (6) (link to cases):

Michael Olson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

James L. Alcorn, II v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Ronald J. Smith, Sr. v.State of Indiana (NFP)

Richard Posley v. State of Indiana (NFP)

William T. Bradley v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Harry G. Campbell v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 16, 2006 01:52 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions