Monday, October 10, 2011
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 10/10/11):
Thursday, October 13th
- 9:00 AM - Annette Hirsch v. Roger Lee Oliver (29S02-1109-DR-530) -
The trial court made several post-dissolution rulings that, among other things, determined Father’s overpayment of child support, declined to require Father to contribute toward his youngest daughter’s post-secondary education expenses, and ordered Mother to pay attorney and witness fees to Father. On Mother’s appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. Hirsch v. Oliver, 944 N.E.2d 956 (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 2-1, March 18, 2011 COA opinion: "We reverse the trial court's emancipation date for Courtney of September 23, 2009, and conclude she was emancipated no earlier than December 10, 2009. We remand for the trial court to recalculate the amount of child support Father has overpaid, and to apportion the payment of uninsured medical expenses incurred by Elizabeth and Courtney in 2009, in accordance with this opinion. We also remand for entry of a post-secondary education expense order as to Father. Finally, we reverse the award to Father of attorney fees and his current wife's travel expenses."
- 9:45 AM - Lakes v. Grange Mut. Cas. Co. (89S05-1109-CT-531) - After an automobile accident, Hannah Lakes and her family members filed a complaint against the other driver, alleging negligence, and against Grange Mutual Casualty Company ("Grange Mutual"), seeking underinsured motorist coverage. The other driver's insurer paid its policy limits. The family members dismissed their claims, leaving Hannah Lakes as the only plaintiff. The Wayne Superior Court granted summary judgment to Grange Mutual, finding no under-insured coverage. The Court of Appeals reversed, comparing the per person liability limits of the two policies to determine the existence of under-insured coverage and stating "the mandatory per person limit for under-insured coverage pursuant to I.C. § 27-7-5-2 is $50,000[.]" Lakes v. Grange Mut. Cas. Co., 944 N.E.2d 509, 519 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction of the appeal.
ILB: This was a 2-1, Feb. 28, 2011 COA opinion reversing the trial court finding that no uninsured motorist coverage was available to plaintiff. ... It is evident that in the years since its inception, Indiana’s uninsured/underinsured motorist statute has undergone significant modification, culminating into an expansion of the underinsured liability coverage. We find that this history of expanding the availability of uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage manifests an intent by our Legislature to give insureds the opportunity for full compensation for injuries inflicted by financially irresponsible motorists."
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 10/17/11):
Tuesday, October 18th
- 1:00 PM - Kathy Inman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (41S01-1108-CT-515) -
Following a jury verdict in favor of Inman on her claim against her insurer for underinsured motorist benefits, Inman sought an award of prejudgment interest under the Tort Prejudgment Interest Statute, Indiana Code, chapter 34-51-4. The trial court denied Inman’s motion. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding among other things, that the statute is applicable to actions for underinsured motorist benefits and that the amount of interest awarded is not affected by the applicable policy limit. Inman v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 938 N.E.2d 1276 (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 is a Dec. 30, 2010 COA opinion concluding: "we conclude that the trial court erred in denying Inman's motion for prejudgment interest pursuant to Indiana Code section 34-51-4-5. Reversed and remanded with instructions that the trial court's order be amended to require payment of prejudgment interest consistent with this opinion."
- 1:45 PM - CG, LLC v. Review Board (93S02-1109-EX-565) - The Unemployment Insurance Review Board of the Department of Workforce Development ruled that employees of a company who accepted the company’s Enhanced Voluntary Termination of Employment Program, a buyout program, are eligible for unemployment benefits under Indiana Code section 22-4-14-1(c). The Court of Appeals reversed. C.G., LLC v. Review Board, 946 N.E.2d 599 (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 was a 2-1 March 17, 2011 COA opinion where the issue was whether the Board erred in ruling that the Employees, who had participated in a buyout program and terminated their employment with CG, were entitled to benefits.
Wednesday, October 19th
- 9:00 AM - Jimmie Ernest Jones, Jr. v. State of Indiana (29S02-1108-CR-511) -
Jones was charged with knowingly killing the victim. The Hamilton Superior Court refused Jones’s tendered instruction on reckless homicide, and a jury convicted Jones of murder. The Court of Appeals affirmed in Jones v. State, 948 N.E.2d 1197 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: From the May 23, 2011 COA opinion: "Jones’s theory of defense was self-defense. Nonetheless, he now argues that the jury, if properly instructed, could have found that he intended only to batter Takash, who died during the commission of that battery, or that he recklessly killed Takash, but did not do so knowingly. * * * Jones was charged with knowingly killing Takash. The information did not assert a battery. In these circumstances, Involuntary Manslaughter was not a factually included lesser offense of Murder."
- 9:45 AM - Jennings Daugherty v. State of Indiana (89S01-1108-CR-513) - Daugherty was in possession of two guns when he was arrested on various charges. In the Wayne Superior Court, he was convicted, among other offenses, on two counts of possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and sentenced to consecutive fifteen-year terms. Daugherty argued the convictions violated the prohibition against double jeopardy. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions and sentences, Daugherty v. State, No. 89A01-1010-CR-520 (Ind. Ct. App. May 9, 2011) (unpublished mem. op.), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a May 9, 2011 COA NFP opinion affirming an habitual offender conviction.
Webcasts of Supreme Court oral arguments are available here.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 10/10/11):
Thursday, October 13th
- 1:30 PM - Apex 1 Processing, Inc., et al, v. Akeala Edwards, et al (49A05-1103-PL-85) - Apex, a "payday loan” business, includes in its loan contracts a compulsory arbitration provision. It moved to compel arbitration on Edwards’ claim against it; the trial court denied the motion because the arbitrator named in the contract was no longer permitted to perform such arbitrations. Apex argues the Federal Arbitration Act required the court to appoint a substitute arbitrator. The Scheduled Panel Members are:Judges Najam, Riley and May. [Where: Info not provided (WEBCAST)]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 10/17/11):
Wednesday, October 19th
- 1:30 PM - Undray D. Wilson v. State of Indiana (34A02-1012-PC-1389) - Undray Wilson was convicted of murder and the Supreme Court affirmed. He sought post-conviction relief alleging his trial counsel was ineffective for failure to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses, challenge misconduct by the prosecutor, or investigate and locate additional witnesses. He argues appellate counsel was ineffective for failure to challenge the admission of certain evidence at trial. Post-conviction relief was denied, and he appeals. The Scheduled Panel Members are:Judges May, Barnes and Crone. [Where: "Oakland City University" - further info not provided]
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 October 10, 2011 10:15 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments