« Ind. Decisions - More on "Court says registry violated offender's constitutional rights" | Main | Ind. Courts - "Markley resigns as Bluffton City Court judge" »

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 3 NFP)

For publication opinions today (1):

In Natare Corporation v. Cardinal Accounts, a four-page opinion, Chief Judge Baker concludes:

It is well established that in pursuing a lawsuit, attorneys are expected to “determine expeditiously” the propriety of continuing the litigation and are expected to dismiss promptly claims that are found to be frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless. Kahn v. Cundiff, 543 N.E.2d 627, 629 (Ind. 1989). If a party continues to litigate a case past that point, the litigation becomes frivolous and attorney fees for the other party “from that point in the litigation at which pursuing the claim became frivolous” are warranted. Id. * * *

It is readily apparent that, at the very least, from the moment that Cardinal sought reinstatement after nine months had elapsed since the dismissal of its complaint—with no credible explanation for the delay or any attempt to argue that its claim was meritorious—this litigation became frivolous. Natare was forced to appeal the erroneous result of the frivolous litigation and should not have to bear the financial burden of its attorneys’ services during the appellate process. Under these circumstances, therefore, we find that Natare is entitled to its appellate attorney fees. Thus, we remand this cause to the trial court for a calculation of the reasonable appellate attorney fees due to Natare.

Natare’s motion to tax costs is granted and remanded with instructions to (1) order Cardinal to pay Natare’s costs in the amount of $333.68, and (2) calculate the amount of Natare’s reasonable appellate attorney fees and order Cardinal to pay that amount.

NFP civil opinions today (2):

Commitment of M.P. (NFP) - "Appellant-respondent M.P. appeals the trial court’s orders requiring that she be involuntarily committed for up to ninety days and involuntarily medicated subject to a thirty-day review. M.P. argues that she should have been permitted to seek an independent psychological evaluation and that there was insufficient evidence supporting the trial court’s decision. Finding no error, we affirm."

Anthony Davis v. Gregory Garrett (NFP) - "Davis argues that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting a portion of a police report into evidence and that the trial court erred in rejecting two of his proffered jury instructions. Davis also contends that he was deprived of a fair trial because of an alleged ex parte communication that occurred between Garrett’s counsel and the trial judge. Finally, Davis claims that some of the comments that the trial judge made were unfairly prejudicial to him. Concluding that the police report was properly admitted into evidence and finding no other error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court."

A dissent begins: "I wholly agree with the majority’s conclusion that the police report was inadmissible hearsay. However, I cannot agree that the admission of the report was harmless error."

NFP criminal opinions today (1):

Sanchez L. Stephens v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 17, 2008 12:00 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions