The Indiana Law Blog: Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 14 NFP)

« Law - "Internet advocate argues for open access to government law and policy" [More] | Main | Law - GAO report blames U.S. News law school rankings for rising cost of legal education »

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 14 NFP)

For publication opinions today (2):

In Sheila Perdue, et al. v. Anne Waltermann Murphy, et al. , a 22-page opinion, Judge Bradford writes:

In this interlocutory appeal we conclude that the plaintiffs' proposed Class B, which names all welfare applicants with disabilities in the State of Indiana who require reasonable accommodation and have been or will be denied benefits due to their alleged failure to cooperate with the FSSA on any number of grounds, is too broad to constitute a manageable class action under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“RA”). We further conclude, however, that a more specific class could perhaps be defined. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's denial of class certification for proposed Class B but remand for a hearing to determine whether a more specific class can be defined.

The Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (“FSSA”) is responsible for the operation of welfare programs in Indiana, including the Food Stamp, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (“TANF”) programs. At some point in 2006 or 2007, FSSA contracted with private company IBM to provide many of these services.[4]
________
[4] We recognize that this contract has recently been cancelled. The parties do not claim that this alters their appeal in the instant matter.

In Jeremy D. Simpson v. State of Indiana , a 15-page opinion, Judge Crone writes:

Jeremy D. Simpson appeals his convictions for class A felony voluntary manslaughter and class D felony criminal recklessness. We affirm.

Issues: I. Did the State present sufficient evidence of probative value to allow the jury to negate Simpson's claim that he was legally justified in shooting the victim to defend a third person? II. Did the trial court commit reversible error in denying Simpson's request to recall a State's witness? III. Did the trial court abuse its discretion in refusing Simpson's jury instruction regarding the presumption of innocence and witness credibility?

NFP civil opinions today (5):

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of S.W., A.H., and A.S.H.; P.H. and A.H. v. Ind. Dept. of Child Svcs. (NFP)

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of Z.E.; and N.R. v. Marion Co. Office, Dept. of Child Svcs., et al. (NFP)

Paternity of E.P.; M.B. v. S.P. (NFP)

Lenell Burse v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, et al. (NFP)

Irvin L. Brimmage v. Review Board, and The Hapak Companies, Inc. (NFP)

NFP criminal opinions today (9):

Stephen Fitzgerald v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Willie Norman v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Matthew Emerson, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Anton Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Bryan D. Cowan v. State of Indiana (NFP)