Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 4 today (and 11 NFP)
For publication opinions today (4):
In Phyllis and Michael Klosinski v. Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy District , a 15-page, 2-1 opinion, Judge Barnes concludes:
The Klosinskis were not adversely affected by an action of the District and were not entitled to bring an action against the District, except with respect to the issue that the District concedes. However, even assuming the Klosinskis were adversely affected by the District's implementation of the septic inspection program, the District was not acting outside of its statutory authority when it implemented that program. We conclude that the trial court erred by finding the Klosinskis were adversely affected, and we reverse that determination. We conclude that the trial court properly denied the Klosinskis' request for an injunction regarding the septic inspection program, and we affirm that determination. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.In Cassandra Johnson and Jarrett Buse v. Anya E. Wait, et al. , a 16-page opinion, JudgeKirsch writes:
VAIDIK, J., concurs.
BAKER, J., dissents in part and concurs in part with separate opinion. [that begins, at p. 13 of 15] I agree with the majority's conclusion that the trial court properly issued a general injunction prohibiting the District from establishing or enforcing rules that do not further the purposes that are set forth in the statute. I also agree that the trial court correctly denied the Klosinskis' request for an injunction regarding the septic inspection program. However, for reasons discussed below, I must part ways with my colleagues' conclusion that the Klosinskis lacked standing to challenge the septic inspection program because they were not “aggrieved” parties in accordance with Indiana Code section 14-33-5-24.
Cassandra Johnson (“Johnson”) and her husband, Jarrett Wayne Buse (“Buse”), appeal from a negative judgment after a jury trial in their medical malpractice action against Erik Jon Wait, M.D. (“Wait”), James R. Miller, M.D. (“Miller”), and St. Mary's Medical Center Welborn (“SMMC”) arising from an undiagnosed bilateral shoulder dislocation and shoulder fracture suffered by Johnson during her hospital stay due to the birth of her child. Johnson raises the following restated issues for our review: I. Whether the trial court erred by giving, over objection, an instruction on contributory negligence that was not supported by the evidence; II. Whether the trial court erred by refusing to give an instruction on res ipsa loquitur; and III. Whether the trial court erred by allowing a defense expert to give certain opinions relating to causation. We affirm.In Lamar M. Crawford v. State of Indiana , a 15-page opinion, Judge Riley concludes:
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that (1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it quashed part of Crawford's request for production of documents to a non-party television production company, and (2) the State produced sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Crawford committed murder.In Jessica Borjas v. State of Indiana , a 6-page opinion, Judge Najam concludes:
In sum, we hold that the State presented sufficient evidence that Borjas uttered a written instrument when she signed Hornbeak's name to authenticate the purchases she made using Hornbeak's credit card. Thus, we affirm her convictions for forgery.NFP civil opinions today (6):
NFP criminal opinions today (5):
Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 12, 2011 11:33 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions