Monday, June 20, 2011
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 6/20/11):
Monday, June 20th
- 9:00 AM - LaPorte Community School Corporatation v. Maria Rosales (46S04-1105-CT-284) - A mother whose a child died after choking on food at school brought a wrongful death action against the school. The LaPorte Circuit Court entered judgment in favor of the mother following a jury trial. The Court of Appeals remanded for a new trial, holding that a jury instruction on negligence was faulty. LaPorte Comm. School Corp. v. Rosales, 936 N.E.2d 281 (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 2-1 Oct. 27, 2010 COA opinion involving issues re expert witness testimony admissibility, motions for judgment on the evidence on issues of negligence and contributory evidence, and whether the trial court properly instructed the jury regarding negligence.
- 9:45 AM - Indiana Department of Insurance v. Robin Everhart (84S01-1105-CV-282) - When the estate of a deceased patient filed a claim for excess medical malpractice damages from the Patient’s Compensation Fund, the Vigo Superior Court awarded the estate $1 million. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a recalculation of damages, including a determination of the patient’s “actual percentage chance of survival.” Ind. Dep’t Ins. v. Everhart, 932 N.E.2d 684 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: See this Dec. 2010 ILB entry headed "Rare 'for publication' dissent in order denying petition for rehearing."
- 10:30 AM - Keith Ramsey, M.D. v. Shella Moore (45S05-1105-CT-281) - Defendants named in a proposed medical malpractice complaint petitioned for a preliminary determination of law, seeking dismissal of the complaint based on the plaintiff’s failure to make a timely submission of evidence to the medical review panel, but the Lake Superior Court entered an order denying the request for dismissal of the complaint. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Ramsey v. Moore, --- N.E.2d ---, No. 45A05-1005-CT-308, (to be published by order of the Court of Appeals) (December 15, 2010), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
Tuesday, June 21st
- 9:00 AM - State of Indiana v. Andy J. Velasquez (53S05-1105-CR-280) - Velasquez was found not guilty on child molesting charges in the Monroe Circuit Court. The State appealed certain “reserved questions” pursuant to Indiana Code section 35-38-4-2, which the Court of Appeals addressed in Velasquez v. State, 944 N.E.2d 34 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted the State’s petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: See this lengthy May 17, 2011 ILB entry, including links to the transfer filings. A quote from the Bloomington H-T: "The Monroe County Prosecutor’s Office pursued the appeal, even though it cannot change the outcome in the Velasquez case. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Bob Miller said the high court’s ruling will clarify what is allowed and set the standard for future cases."
- 9:45 AM - Keith Hoglund v. State of Indiana (90S02-1105-CR-294) - Hoglund was convicted of child molesting. Over his objection, the Wells Circuit Court admitted testimony relating to the victim’s propensity to falsify her account of the events. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in Hoglund v. State, 945 N.E.2d 166 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a Feb. 22, 2010 opinion: "Appellant/Defendant Keith Hoglund appeals from his conviction of and sentence for Class A felony Child Molesting. Hoglund contends that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting testimony regarding whether the victim was falsifying or exaggerating stories of Hoglund’s molestation of her, whether the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him, and whether his fifty-year sentence is inappropriately harsh. We affirm"
- 10:30 AM - Henry C. Bennett, et al. v. John E. Richmond, et al. (20S03-1105-CV-293) - The Elkhart Superior Court allowed a psychologist to testify that Richmond’s head injury was caused by a vehicle collision, and the jury awarded damages to Richmond. The Court of Appeals reversed in Bennett v. Richmond, 932 N.E.2d 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: An Aug. 13, 2010 COA opinion: "Bennett presents a single issue for our review, namely, whether the trial court abused its discretion when it permitted Sheridan McCabe, Ph.D., to testify that Richmond had sustained a brain injury as a result of the vehicular accident caused by Bennett. We reverse and remand for a new trial."
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 6/27/11):
- 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 6/20/11):
Thursday, June 23rd
- 2:30 PM - Cynthia Welch v. Shawn D. Young, et al. (79A02-1012-CT-1407 ) - Cynthia Welch was passing out gum to members of a little league team when a player, who was taking practice swings, hit her knee with his bat. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants on the grounds that Welch was a "participant" in the sporting event and therefore incurred the risk of her injury. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, Najam, and May. [Where: Indiana State University, Tirey Hall - Tilson Auditorium, Terre Haute, Indiana]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 6/27/11):
Next Monday, June 27th
- 1:30 PM - George A. Feuston v. State of Indiana. (38A02-1011-CR-1175) - George A. Feuston appeals the denial of his motion for discharge pursuant to Indiana Criminal Rule 4(C). In March 2009, Feuston was arrested and charged in Jay County. While out on bond, he was arrested and charged in Delaware County. After his second arrest, no further action was taken in the Jay County case until August 2010. Feuston sought to be discharged, arguing that the Jay County Superior Court could have set a trial date even in his absence. The State contends that because Feuston did not provide the court with written notice of his whereabouts, the time he spent in the Delaware County Jail should be charged to him. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb, Judges Najam and Crone. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Next Tuesday, June 28th
- 1:30 PM - Wellpoint, Inc., et al. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co., et al. (49A05-1011-PL-670) - This is an insurance coverage dispute. The plaintiff companies allege that the defendant insurers wrongfully denied coverage in twelve underlying lawsuits. One of defendant insurers moved for summary judgment, claiming it owed no coverage because the underlying lawsuits related back to litigation preceding its coverage period. The trial court granted summary judgment, and the plaintiffs now appeal. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Kirsch, Vaidik, and Mathias. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Next Wednesday, June 29th
- 1:30 PM - S. G. vs. State of Indiana (49A05-1011-JV-736) - S.G. appeals his adjudication as a delinquent child for committing an act that would be considered Class D felony receiving stolen property if committed by an adult and raises three issues: (1) Whether the school meeting constituted custodial interrogation such that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting, over S.G.'s objection, the incriminating statements S.G. made during that meeting when he had neither been advised of his Miranda rights nor had the opportunity to consult with his parents; (2) Whether the evidence was sufficient to show that S.G. knowingly or intentionally had contact with any property that was the subject of theft; and (3) Whether the trial court abused its discretion when it imposed a restitution order in an amount greater than the victim's actual loss and made restitution a condition of probation without inquiring into S.G.'s ability to pay. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Kirsch, Vaidik, and, Mathias. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
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 June 20, 2011 07:46 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments