Monday, October 04, 2010
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 10/4/10):
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 10/11/10):
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
Webcasts of Supreme Court oral arguments are available here.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 10/4/10):
[Note: Two cases have been added since last week's listing: Arlton and Fox.]
Monday, October 4th
- 12:00 PM - Paul Arlton vs. Gary Schraut, M.D., et al. (# not provided) - Appellant-Plaintiff Paul Arlton brought a medial malpractice action against Appellee-Defendant Gary Schraut, M.D., alleging that Arlton had suffered permanent injury to his eye as a result of laser eye surgery performed by Schraut. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Schraut. On appeal, Arlton claims: (1) that the trial court abused its discretion when it sustained Schraut's objections to Arlton's proffer of printed, enlarged copies of angiograms depicting Arlton's retina; (2) that the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to provide the jury with access to digital evidence during deliberations; and (3) that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing Arlton's tendered instruction informing the jury that, if they so desired, they could review the digital evidence during deliberations. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Baker, Judges Najam and Mathias. [Where: Moot Court Room, Indiana University Maurer School of Law, Bloomington, Indiana]
- 3:00 PM - Quintez Deloney vs. State of Indiana (22A01-0906-CR-273) - Quintez Deloney appeals his conviction of Class A felony attempted robbery resulting in serious bodily injury and Class B felony burglary resulting in bodily injury. The parties will argue whether expert testimony regarding DNA found on a red hat at the scene of the crime should have been admitted when that expert could not state a statistical probability that Deloney was the source of the DNA, and instead would say only that the analysis could "not exclude" Deloney as a contributor of the DNA. Also at issue is the propriety of Deloney's eighty-year sentence. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Bailey, May and Brown. [Where: Shanklin Theatre, Hyde Hall, University of Evansville]
Tuesday, October 5th
- 10:00 AM - Rex E. Breeden Revocable Trust vs. Rebecca Jan Hoffmeister-Repp (03A04-1003-CT-185) - Plaintiff appeals trial court's entry of summary judgment in an action for rescission/damages arising from a contract for the sale of residential real estate. Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred and that there are material questions of fact they make summary judgment inappropriate. The threshold issue is whether the contract is exempt from the Residential Real Estate Disclosure Act because the purchaser was a revocable trust and the statute excludes transfers to a living trust from its applicability. The second issue raised is whether under general principles of contract and tort law, the defendant has demonstrated that she is entitled to summary judgment. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Riley, Kirsch and Bailey. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
- 2:00 PM - Hunt Construction Group vs. Shannon D. Garrett (49A02-1001-CT-86) - This case deals with liability for a workplace injury on the Lucas Oil Stadium project. The trial court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, ruling that Hunt Construction Group was liable for her injuries. Hunt Construction argues that since the owner, not Hunt Construction, held the contracts from her employer that the Owner should be liable. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Friedlander, Barnes and Crone. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Wednesday, October 6th
- 1:00 PM - Stacey Price v. State of Indiana (34A02-1004-CR-366) - Stacy Price was convicted following a jury trial of dealing in cocaine, a Class A felony. On appeal, Price argues the trial court erred in admitting two exhibits offered by the State over her objection because the State failed to prove the chain of custody. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges May, Robb and Vaidik. [Where: Benton Central Jr.-Sr. High School, 4241 East 300 South, Oxford, Indiana 47971]
Thursday, October 7th
- 10:00 AM - Sharon Gill, on her own behalf and on behalf of the Estate of GALE GILL vs. Evansville Sheet Metal Works, Inc. ( 49A05-0912-CV-699) - Gale Gill died of lung cancer which his wife, Sharon Gill, alleges was caused by exposed to asbestos while he worked as a contractor at Evansville Sheet Metal Works. On behalf of her husband's estate, Sharon appeals the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Evansville Sheet Metal Works. The Appellant presents the following issue for our review on appeal: whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment where the Appellees failed to meet their burden to establish that Indiana Code section 32-3-1-5 (the Construction Statute of Repose) applies to this case to bar Sharon's claim. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Riley, Kirsch and Bailey. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
- 1:30 PM - Sheila Perdue, et al vs. Anne Waltermann Murphy, et al (49A02-1003-PL-250) - The ACLU of Indiana brought a class action complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to enjoin practices of the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration whereby adverse action notices were issued to applicants and recipients of assistance under Medicaid, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which notices generically alleged a failure to cooperate but did not specify which verification document was not provided (according to FSSA records). The complaint further alleged that, with respect to SNAP, the FSSA failed to comply with the federally-mandated "refusal to cooperate" standard, instead implementing a "failure to cooperate" standard. With regard to Sheila Perdue, it was also alleged that the FSSA violated the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Upon cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court found that, despite the lack of specificity in an adverse action notice, the FSSA procedures (as a whole) satisfied due process requirements and FSSA was entitled to partial summary judgment in that regard. However, the trial court issued a declaratory judgment and injunction against the FSSA on two bases: that the FSSA had, in violation of federal law governing SNAP, utilized a "failure to cooperate" standard as opposed to a "refusal to cooperate" standard, and had violated Perdue's rights under the ADA. The parties now cross-appeal. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Riley, Kirsch and Bailey. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Friday, October 8th
- 1:00 PM - Bruce R. Fox vs. Dennis Rice and West Central Community Corrections (# not provided) - Bruce Fox was taken from serving a sentence in the Department of Correction to the Montgomery County Jail where he was incarcerated for an additional 112 days. Fox claimes his incarceration was wrongful, and filed a complaint against the Montgomery County Sheriff, the Montgomery County Prosecutor, and West Central Community Corrections. Fox appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment to West Central Community Corrections, arguing the trial court erroneously granted summary judgment by finding the time for filing a tort claim notice began to run on the first day he was incarcerated at the Montgomery County Jail, West Central was not the cause of his injury, and West Central was immune from liability. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Kirsch, May, and Robb. [Where: Bruce R. Fox vs. Dennis Rice and West Central Community Corrections]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 10/11/10):
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
ONLY those Court of Appeals oral arguments presented in the Supreme or Court of Appeals Courtrooms will be accessible via videocast.
The past COA webcasts which have been webcast are accessible here.
NOTE: For a printable version of this list of upcoming oral arguments, click on the date in the next line. Then select "Print" from your browser.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 4, 2010 08:37 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments