« Ind. Law - "Baker & Daniels possible merger part of a larger legal trend" | Main | Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit issues one Indiana opinion today »

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 12 NFP)

For publication opinions today (2):

In Murat Temple Association, Inc. (MTA) v. Live Nation Worldwide, et al., a 12-page opinion, Sr. Judge Garrard writes:

MTA argues that in the absence of a provision explicitly granting Live Nation the power to rename the Leased Premises, a reading of the Lease that allows Live Nation to sell naming rights to a third party is, in essence, based on an implied covenant in fact. We disagree. Unless otherwise agreed to or specifically reserved, everything which belongs to the demised premises in a lease or is used with and is appurtenant to the premises, and which is reasonably necessary to their beneficial use and enjoyment, will be considered as incident to the premises. Section 1.01 explicitly grants Live Nation “any and all rights” MTA may have as to the 1909 Theatre Building and the 1922 Mosque Building. The Lease employs clear and unambiguous language. There is no need to imply a covenant in fact in this case.
In Gordon B. Dempsey v. Dept. of Metropolitan Development, a 9-page opinion in a pro se appeal, Judge Baker writes:
A property owner paid a penalty that was imposed by the Department of Metropolitan Development of the City of Indianapolis (DMD) under the Unsafe Building Law while an appeal was pending that avoided a tax sale. The trial court determined that the case was moot and granted the DMD’s motion to dismiss the appeal. We hold that the case was not rendered moot merely because the homeowner voluntarily paid the fines and penalties to avoid the tax sale.

Appellant-petitioner Gordon B. Dempsey appeals the grant of appellee-respondent DMD’s motion to dismiss an appeal that Dempsey brought in the trial court. Dempsey argues that the trial court erred in granting the DMD’s motion to dismiss the appeal as moot merely because he paid a fine under protest to avert a tax sale.

We conclude that Dempsey’s appeal is not moot merely because he paid the fine under protest. Thus, we reverse the trial court’s dismissal of Dempsey’s appeal and remand this cause to the trial court with instructions that it determine whether a fine was warranted.

NFP civil opinions today (2):

Michael S. Fahlbeck v. Bryan Bucklen, et al. (NFP)

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of N.D.; H.D. and D.D. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)

NFP criminal opinions today (10):

Kurt St. Angelo v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Winfred Jefferson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jeffrey L. Turnmire v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jose Cruz v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Steven Young v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Cartier D. Tasby v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Kenny Mong v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Purl Robert Silk III v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Johnny Doe Olinger v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Harrion Dixon v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 16, 2011 11:58 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions