« Ind. Decisions - Transfer list for week ending August 24, 2012 | Main | Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit decides one Indiana case today, a reversal »

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 11 NFP)

For publication opinions today (2):

In Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Bill Gaddis Chrysler Dodge, Inc., Garrett Gaddis and Edward Foster, a 12-page opinion, Judge Najam concluded:

We hold that the trial court did not err when it granted Foster’s motion for extension of time, which was timely filed under Trial Rule 56(C). Accordingly, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied Auto-Owners’ motion to strike Foster’s response. And while the trial court should have stricken the four challenged exhibits Foster submitted as designated evidence, Auto-Owners has not shown prejudice in that the other eleven exhibits are sufficient to establish a genuine issue of material fact. Finally, we agree with the trial court that there exist genuine issues of material fact whether Garrett owned the car and whether Garrett was an insured under the garage liability policy. The trial court did not err when it denied Auto-Owners’ summary judgment motion.
In Willis Pryor v. State of Indiana, a 12-page opinion, Judge Brown writes:
Willis Pryor appeals his conviction for resisting law enforcement as a class A misdemeanor and argues that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Pryor raises one issue, which we revise and restate as whether trial counsel’s failure to preserve Pryor’s right to a jury trial denied him the effective assistance of counsel. We reverse and remand. * * *

Pryor argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to file a timely demand for a jury trial because he inadvertently miscalculated the deadline date. Pryor argues that “[t]he record is unclear as to when trial Attorney Cicchini learned of Pryor’s desire to be tried by jury” but that “it must have been sometime on or before January 17, 2011.” Pryor points to this court’s opinions in Stevens and Lewis and asserts that the failure to file a timely demand was a mistake and not a choice or strategy and that he was prejudiced by his trial counsel’s deficient performance. * * *

Based upon the record, we find that the failure of Pryor’s counsel to timely file a written request for a jury trial fell below the range of professionally competent representation.

NFP civil opinions today (6):

Margaret R. Smith and Darrell G. Smith v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, as Trustee Under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, Dated as of June 1, 2003, et al. (NFP)

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of J.K., M.K., and C.K. (Minor Children); and S.P. (Mother) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)

Jean D. Schoknecht v. Susan E. Dunlap f/k/a Hasemeier and f/k/a Scribner (NFP)

Bradley J. Vossberg, and Diana Jachimiak v. Glen A. Gray, Kimberly L. Gray, and Kevin Hardie, d/b/a The Hardie Group (NFP)

William N. Gerard v. Althea L. Gerard (NFP)

In the Matter of A.J.J.: J.J. v. S.H. (NFP)

NFP criminal opinions today (5):

Edward LeFlore v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert Brandon v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jerry L. Ward, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Timothy Tingle v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Eugene Strader v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 29, 2012 01:33 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions