The Indiana Law Blog: Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 today (and 22 NFP)

« Law - "Ohio Wine Lovers to be Cut-off October 1" [Updated] | Main | Ind. Courts - List of those applicants who were successful on the July 2007 Indiana Bar Examination »

Friday, September 28, 2007

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 today (and 22 NFP)

For publication opinions today (3):

In Crider & Crider, Inc. v. Royal Downen and Anthony Ross "Tony" Downen , a 9-page opinion, Judge Bailey writes:

Appellant-Defendant Crider & Crider, Inc. (“Crider”) appeals the denial of its motion to correct error, which challenged the $37,267.52 award of damages to Appellees-Plaintiffs Royal Downen and Anthony Downen (collectively, “the Downens”) after Crider admitted it breached its contract for the rental of the Downens’ farm property to dispose of muck generated in the process of highway construction. We revise the award of damages to $35,760.00. * * *

The trial court properly awarded damages for partial restoration of the property and for diminution in value and the amount of those damages was within the range of the evidence presented. However, the evidence on damage to personal property supports a maximum award of $8,000.00. Therefore, we reduce the award of damages by $1,507.52, providing for a revised damages award of $35,760.00. Revised.

In Delta Building Group, Inc. v. Michael A. Laurenzano and Livia A. Laurenzano and Newcomer Lumber and Supply Co., Inc., et al., a 12-page opinion, Judge Crone writes:

Case Summary. Delta Building Group, Inc. (“Delta”) appeals the trial court’s finding in favor of Michael A. Laurenzano and Livia A. Laurenzano (collectively “the Laurenzanos”) on their complaint for interpleader. We affirm.

Issue. The dispositive issue is whether the trial court violated the Uniform Arbitration Act (“the UAA”) by improperly modifying or vacating a prior arbitration award. * * *

Delta claims that the trial court violated the UAA by improperly modifying and/or vacating the arbitration award in the instant case. The Laurenzanos counter that they never intended to challenge the arbitration award and that the trial court’s orders “simply enforce[d] the arbitration award and protect[ed] the Laurenzanos from multiple liability.” We agree. * * *

[W]e agree with the Laurenzanos that the trial court’s orders enforced the arbitrator’s award and distributed it so as to protect the Laurenzanos from multiple liability as to these particular funds.1 In sum, we see no error in the trial court’s decision to find in favor of the Laurenzanos on their complaint for interpleader. * * *

The trial court distribution order simply enforced the agreed stipulation entered into by Newcomer, Window One, and Thermocore. We find no error in the trial court’s distribution of funds.

In Carl A. Major v. State of Indiana , a 19-page opinion, Judge Bradford writes:

Following a jury trial, Appellant-Defendant Carl Major appeals his convictions for three counts of Murder in the Perpetration of a Robbery, a felony,1 and one count of Aggravated Battery as a Class B felony2 and his corresponding aggregate sentence of 175 years. Upon appeal, Major claims the trial court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury and that his sentence was inappropriate. Concluding that the trial court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury but that such error was harmless, and further, that Major’s sentence was not inappropriate, we affirm.

NFP civil opinions today (7):

Dawn D. Davis v. Review Board and Rossville Consolidated School District (NFP) - denial of unemployment benefits affirmed.

Stephen H. and Jennifer A. Perlmutter v. E.E. Brandenberger Construction, Inc. (NFP) - "We conclude the Perlmutters were unjustly enriched by improvements they requested and then refused to pay for, the parties’ conduct modified the terms of the construction contract, and the Perlmutters breached the contract. The trial court did not err in awarding Brandenberger attorney fees; however, the trial court awarded double recovery to Brandenberger and the judgment should be reduced by the amount of that double recovery. Judgment affirmed in part and remanded in part."

Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of E.E.S. and E.T.S. and J.S.S.; Melissa Plumm v. Bartholomew County Department of Child Services - "The BCOFC agreed to support “the family bond” until Plumm was released from prison and had an opportunity to carry out the case plan requirements, and it violated that agreement by proceeding with termination prior to her release from prison. We disapprove of this type of agreement, because it restricts the OFC from acting pursuant to the termination statutes or in the best interests of the children. Nevertheless, neither can we allow an OFC to ignore such an agreement when the parent’s consideration for the agreement was, in essence, waiver of the right to due process at the CHINS proceeding. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion."

Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of E.N.; Dawn Nowak v. Lake County Department of Child Services and CASA (NFP) - Dawn Nowak appeals the termination of her parental rights to E.N. Affirmed

Matter of the Commitment of H.H. v. Wishard Health Services Midtown Health Center (NFP) - "H.H. appeals from the trial court’s order involuntarily committing him temporarily to a mental institution.1 He raises one issue, which we restate as whether sufficient evidence supported the finding that he is dangerous or gravely disabled. * * * Given the evidence presented, and applying the proper standard of review, we find that the temporary involuntary commitment order represents a conclusion that a reasonable person could have drawn. Indeed, there was sufficient evidence to meet one or both prongs of Indiana Code Section 12-26-6-1. Hence, we must affirm."

Steven E. Jahn, Greg Tucker and Cindy Tucker v. Patrick Hogan and Cynthia Hogan (NFP) - 27-page opinion. "Appellants Greg and Cindy Tucker (collectively, “the Tuckers”) and Steven Jahn (“Jahn”) appeal an order of the Allen Superior Court providing that Jahn is liable for damages and punitive damages attributable to his fraud in a real estate transaction, and also liable for contract-based attorney’s fees, and the Tuckers are liable for nuisance and for interference with an easement possessed by Patrick and Cynthia Hogan (collectively, “the Hogans”) across a pond touching the Tucker and Hogan properties. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings with respect to damages."

Tracy A. Butler v. Alan D. Butler (NFP) - "Tracy Butler (“Mother”) appeals the grant of custody of their two children to her ex-husband Alan Butler (“Father”). Mother claims the court erroneously gave preference to Father because he would be “co-parenting” with Nancy Butler, the children’s paternal grandmother (“Grandmother”). This was improper, she asserts, because the court did not enter the findings required for Grandmother to be a de facto custodian. Because the evidence, findings, and judgment do not support Mother’s position regarding the court’s consideration of Grandmother, we affirm."

NFP criminal opinions today (15):

Rickey E. Graham v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert D. Hoskins v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert Clark v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Danny L. Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Edward G. Sallee v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Crawford L. Arrington v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Terrence Coleman v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Clyde Piggie v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Justin Bunch v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Ronald Mastrog v. State of Indiana (NFP)

John A. Murphy v. State of Indiana (NFP)