Monday, March 28, 2011
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 3/28/11):
Wednesday, March 30th
- 9:00 AM - Misty Davis v. Animal Control - City of Evansville (82S01-1102-CV-77) - After her son was injured by an unrestrained Rottweiler, Davis brought an action against the City of Evansville, among others. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants, holding they were entitled to law enforcement immunity. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals reversed, holding the defendants were not entitled to immunity. Davis v. Animal Control - City of Evansville, No. 82A01-0911-CV-527 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transferthe case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a 2-1, Aug. 27, 2010 NFP COA opinion - at issue was the City of Evansville's claim of immunity for injuries Davis sustained from a dog bite relating to the action or inaction of Animal Control. From the dissent: "To me, the underlying action is one for the failure to enforce the section of the Evansville Municipal Code relating to the regulation of dangerous animals and falls squarely within the immunity set forth at IC 34-13-3-3(8)."
- 9:45 AM - Mary Beth & Perry Lucas v. U.S. Bank, N.A., et al. (28S01-1102-CV-78) - When the bank instituted a foreclosure action and the defendants filed counterclaims against the bank and third-party claims against the loan servicer based on federal and state statutory law and state common law, the trial court denied the defendants' request for a trial by jury on their claims. In this interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed and held that the defendants are entitled to a trial by jury on their legal claims. Lucas v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 932 N.E.2d 239 (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 Aug. 11, 2010 COA opinion. From the opinion: "While a foreclosure action is essentially equitable and it is well settled that equitable claims are tried to a court rather than to a jury, the fact that a cause contains a foreclosure action does not necessarily draw the entire cause into equity. Indeed, when, as here, the essential features of the cause are not equitable, a party is entitled to a jury trial on the legal claims."
- 10:30 AM - Rod Avery, et al. v. Trina Avery (49S05-1102-PL-76) - The Marion Superior Court granted the plaintiff's motion for default judgment after determining that defendants failed to file a timely answer to a will contest complaint. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that a will contest is a civil action and that a defendant in a will contest is required to file an answer or otherwise plead to a complaint as provided by the Indiana Trial Rules. Avery v. Avery, 932 N.E.2d 1280 (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 a Sept. 27, 2010, 2-1 opinion - here is the ILB summary. The COA ruled: "Again, a will contest is a freestanding cause of action separate and distinct from the administration of an estate, and the trial rules generally apply to will contests. We hold that the Averys were required to file a timely answer to Trina’s complaint. They failed to do so. The trial court did not err when it entered default judgment against the Averys."
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 4/6/11):
- 9:00 AM - Indiana Spine Group, P.C. v. Pilot Travel Centers, LLC (93S02-1102-EX-90) - Indiana Spine Group filed an application with the Worker's Compensation Board ("Board") seeking the outstanding balance on a bill for medical treatment provided to an employee with the approval of Pilot Travel Centers, the employer. The Board dismissed the application on grounds it was time barred by the Worker's Compensation Act's statutes of limitations. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. Indiana Spine Group, P.C. v. Pilot Travel Centers, LLC , 931 N.E.2d 435 (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 Aug. 10, 2010 COA opinion. Some quotes: "Did the Board err in determining that it did not have jurisdiction because the Application was filed outside the statute of limitations set out in the Worker’s Compensation Act (the Act)? We reverse and remand. * * * We reject Pilot’s invitation to apply the statute of limitations set out in I.C. § 22-3-3-27, which by its plain language is not applicable here. In fact, application in this context could lead to absurd results."
- 9:45 AM - Franklin Electric Co. v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals of the Department of Workforce Development (93S02-1102-EX-89) - An Administrative Law Judge ruled that two newly formed subsidiaries of a company were not new and separate employers for purposes of the Indiana Unemployment Compensation Act. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the subsidiaries were not entitled to a lower unemployment tax rate than the parent company. Franklin Elec. Co. v. Unemployment Ins. Appeals of the Dep't of Workforce Dev., 928 N.E.2d 880 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: Looking for case ...
- 10:30 AM - State of Indiana v. Amanda Renzulli (32S04-1102-CR-117) - A citizen called 911 to report a drunk driver pulling into a gas station. A few moments later, police observed a car, matching the description given by the caller, backing out of a parking space at the gas station. An officer directed the driver to stop. The driver was determined to be intoxicated. The State charged Renzulli with operating a vehicle while intoxicated. The Hendricks Superior Court granted Renzulli’s motion to suppress the evidence obtained after the vehicle had been stopped. A divided Court of Appeals affirmed in State v. Renzulli, 935 N.E.2d 200 (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 a 23-page, for publication, Oct. 5, 2010, 1-1-1 opinion where Judge Riley began the 7-page "majority" opinion with a footnote #1 that reads: "Under the criteria set forth in Appellate Rule 65, I vote not to publish this opinion."
Webcasts of Supreme Court oral arguments are available here.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 3/28/11):
Monday, March 28th
- 10:30 AM - Walter L. Liddell v. State of Indiana (45A03-1006-CR-339) - Walter Lee Liddell appeals his convictions for rape, criminal confinement, and other related offenses. Liddell claims that the trial court erred by denying his requests to (a) exclude a newly-discovered witness or (b) continue the trial to provide an adequate opportunity for investigation and strategic response. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Vaidik, Barnes, and Crone. [Where: Valparaiso University School of Law, Tabor Classroom, 656 South Greenwich Street, Valparaiso, Indiana]
Tuesday, March 29th
- 10:00 AM - Margaret Roupp and Indiana Family and Social Services Administration v. Robert Roupp (41A01-1007-MI-335) - In anticipation of his wife Margaret's application for Medicaid benefits, Robert Roupp sought a trial court order allocating spousal support. The trial court issued an order transferring income and martial assets to Robert and increasing Robert's community spouse resource allowance ("CSRA"), the amount of assets exempt from being spent down prior to Medicaid eligibility. The trial court based its order on the common law doctrine of necessaries and held that the order was subject to recognition upon Margaret's application for Medicaid. The Indiana Family and Social Services Administration ("FSSA") was permitted to intervene in the case and now appeals from the denial of its motion to correct error. FSSA argues that the trial court's order is contrary to law because the doctrine of necessaries does not apply, and also argues that under the facts of this case the trial court's adjustment of the CSRA conflicts with applicable Medicaid law. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb and Judges Riley and Brown. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
- 1:00 PM - Robert L. Clark and Debra Clark v. Robert L. Clark, Sr. (01A02-1007-CT-759) [Rescheduled] - Robert L. Clark, Jr. (Junior) was injured when he was struck by a car driven by his father. The trial court granted summary judgment for the father, on the ground that Junior was being transported in or upon the motor vehicle for purposes of the application of the Indiana Guest Statute, Ind. Code § 34-30-11-1. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb and Judges May and Vaidik [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Wednesday, March 30th
- 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]
Thursday, March 31st
- 2:30 PM - Rodney Nicholson v. State of Indiana (55A01-1005-CR-251) - Rodney Nicholson appeals his conviction for Class C felony stalking. Nicholson argues that the trial court improperly admitted evidence of his prior bad acts. He also argues that there is insufficient evidence to support the stalking conviction. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Barnes, Crone, and Bradford. [Where: Indiana University South Bend, Northside Hall (Recital Hall, Rm 158), South Bend, Indiana]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 4/8/11):
Monday, April 4th
- 1:00 PM - Edward Godby v. State of Indiana (69A01-1009-CR-504 ) - Edward Godby was convicted of a number of methamphetamine-related offenses based in part on material police found in a locked box in his garage. Godby's wife consented to a search of the garage after the police gave her false information about why they wanted to search. Godby asserts the consent was therefore invalid, and even if his wife could consent to a search of the garage, she could not consent to a search of his locked box. Finally, Godby asserts he was subjected to double jeopardy because all the charged offenses were part of the same illegal course of action. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Bailey, May, and Brown. [Where: University of Southern Indiana, University Center, Carter Hall D, Evansville, Indiana]
Tuesday, April 5th
- 2:30 PM - Uniontown Retail 36, LLC d/b/a The Lion's Den #36 v. Board of Commissioners of Jackson County (36A01-1008-MI-434) - The issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the Board of Commissioners of Jackson County on its action to enjoin operation of a sexually oriented business by Uniontown Retail 36, LLC d/b/a The Lion's Den #36. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Najam, Darden and Bailey. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
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 28, 2011 08:15 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments