Monday, March 14, 2011
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 3/14/11):
Thursday, March 17th
- 1:00 PM - Alrita Morehead v. Duane Deitrich (09A04-1003-CT-172) - Postal carrier Alrita Morehead filed a complaint against landlord Duane Deitrich after a tenants' dog escaped the leased premises and bit Morehead on a public sidewalk. The trial court granted summary judgment to Deitrich, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Morehead v. Deitrich, 932 N.E.2d 1272 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). Transfer is pending. Morehead has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a Sept. 1, 2010 COA opinion (4th case). From the COA: "We agree that it is reasonably foreseeable that a vicious dog, upon escaping its house or yard and encountering a stranger on a sidewalk, may bite that stranger. We, however, cannot say that it is reasonably foreseeable that that dog indeed will escape its confinement. It is not the dog's mere presence on leased property that causes harm. Rather, it is the owner's failure to adequately confine that dog. Thus, we do not conclude that there is a high degree of foreseeability that leasing property to the owners of vicious dogs will result in injury to third parties."
- 1:45 PM - Nathan D. Brock v. State of Indiana (38S02-1101-CR-8) - Brock was charged with operating a motor vehicle after his driving privileges had been suspended for life. At the first trial, the Jay Superior Court declared a mistrial with no objection from Brock. The trial court denied Brock's motion to dismiss the charges on double jeopardy grounds, and Brock was convicted at the second trial. The Court of Appeals affirmed in Brock v. State, 936 N.E.2d 266 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was an Oct. 26, 2010 COA opinion. From the COA: "Brock argues that his convictions violate double jeopardy because the trial court granted the State's request for a mistrial at the close of the first trial in the absence of a manifest necessity to do so and then permitted the State to retry Brock, resulting in the convictions at issue herein. Finding that the mistrial and subsequent retrial do not violate double jeopardy, we affirm."
- 2:30 PM - Brenda Moore v. State of Indiana (49S04-1101-CR-24) - Moore was arrested for public intoxication while she was a passenger in a vehicle. She was convicted at a bench trial in the Marion Superior Court. A divided Court of Appeals reversed, finding Moore had not been in a public place. Moore v. State 935 N.E.2d 301 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was an Oct.25, 2010, 2-1 opinion - here is the ILB summary - 3rd case. At issue is what does it mean to be "intoxicated in a public place or place of public resort within the meaning of Indiana Code section 7.1-5-1-3."
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 3/21/11):
- None currently scheduled.
Webcasts of Supreme Court oral arguments are available here.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 3/14/11):
Wednesday, March 16th
- 10:00 AM - R.L. Turner Corporation v. Town of Brownsburg (32A01-1008-PL-373) - In this appeal, R.L. Turner Corporation appeals the trial court's award of $27,410.67 in attorney's fees to the Town of Brownsburg. The parties disagree as to the time limit, if any, following the entry of a final judgment during which a trial court may consider a prevailing party's petition for attorney's fees. R.L. Turner also asserts error in the trial court's conclusion that its claims against the Town were frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Mathias, Crone, and Bradford. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Thursday, March 17th
- 8:58 AM - Terrance Tindall v. State of Indiana (49A02-1006-CR-855) - Terrance Tindall appeals following his conviction for Class D felony Dealing in Marijuana. Upon appeal Tindall challenges the admissibility of certain evidence used against him on the grounds that it violates the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Darden, Crone, and Bradford. [Where: Pike High School - Performing Arts Center, 5401 West 71st Street, Indianapolis, Indiana]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 3/21/11):
Tuesday, March 22nd
- 12:30 PM - Richard Sigo, Jr. v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company (25A03-1008-PL-406) - Richard Sigo, Jr.'s home was insured by Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company ("Prudential") when it was destroyed by fire in 2004. The homeowner's policy excludes payment for intentional losses, defined as a loss arising out of an act committed by or at the direction of the insured with the intent to cause a loss. Prudential contends Sigo caused the fire and has refused to pay the claim. Sigo filed a complaint against Prudential for bad faith and breach of contract. Concurrently with this civil litigation, Sigo was charged and tried for arson; a jury found him not guilty. At issue in this interlocutory appeal is the trial court's grant of Prudential's motion in limine to exclude from the jury trial any evidence concerning Sigo's trial and acquittal for arson. Sigo contends the trial court abused its discretion in weighing the probative value of the evidence against the danger of unfair prejudice to Prudential. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb and Judges Riley and May. [Where: LaPorte High School, 602 F Street, LaPorte, Indiana]
Thursday, March 24th
- 11:00 AM - Roland Ball v. State of Indiana (06A01-1007-CR-426) - Roland Ball was convicted of sexual battery, a Class D felony, following an incident in which he kissed a sleeping acquaintance. Ball appeals his conviction, contending the trial court committed fundamental error in instructing the jury, the State failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove the elements of the crime - specifically that the victim was "mentally disabled or deficient" by virtue of being asleep - and he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb and Judges Riley and May. [Where: Indiana State University, Hulman Memorial Student Union Building, Terre Haute, Indiana]
Friday, March 25th
- 1:30 PM - John Witt et al. v. Jay Petroleum, Inc. et al. (38A02-0912-CV-1290) - Appellants John Witt, Amanda Witt, and HydroTech Corp. filed suit against Appellees Jay Petroleum, Inc., and Jack James for damages arising from cleanup costs for environmental damage on property owned by the Witts and previously used by Jay Petroleum and James. Appellees sought and obtained a temporary restraining order against further excavation by the Witts and their agent, HydroTech. Over one year later, the Witts, HydroTech, and their attorney, Appellant Mark Shere, were held in contempt of court for having continued excavation on the day the restraining order was issued. All four Appellants now appeal, raising issues regarding the terms of the restraining order, whether any of the Appellants should have been held in contempt, whether any of the Appellants may rely upon the advice of counsel as a defense, whether the damages awarded to Appellees as a result of contempt of court are excessive, and the trial court's assessment of those damages among the Appellants jointly and severally. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Najam, Darden, and Bailey. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
ILB: Looks interesting!
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 March 14, 2011 08:36 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments