Monday, April 22, 2013
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 4/22/13):
Tuesday, April 23rd
- 12:45 PM - Brian Yost v. Wabash College, et al. (54S01-1303-CT-161) - A former fraternity pledge sued the college, local fraternity chapter, and national fraternity after being injured in activities involving several members of the fraternity. The trial court awarded summary judgment to the defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed, unanimously as to the national fraternity and by divided vote as to the college and local fraternity chapter. Yost v. Wabash College, 976 N.E.2d 724 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal. Note: The oral argument will be held at Indiana University – East in the Vivian Auditorium
Whitewater Hall, 2325 Chester Boulevard, Richmond, IN 46734
ILB: This is a Oct. 12, 2012 2-1 opinion in a college hazing case.
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of (4/29/13):
- None currently scheduled.
Webcasts of Supreme Court oral arguments are available here.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 4/22/13):
Thursday, April 25th
- 11:00 AM - Paul Komyatti, Jr., v. The Consolidated City of Indianapolis-Marion County and Citizens Energy Group ( 49A04-1209-CT-445) In June 2010, Paul Komyatti rode his bicycle to an Indianapolis bar, drank some beers, and started biking home. As Komyatti was biking at least twenty miles per hour on the left side of the street under a railroad bridge, his front wheel struck a water-filled pothole. Komyatti fell off his bike and was injured. He was taken to the hospital, where his blood alcohol concentration was measured at .137, which exceeds the .08 legal limit for operating a vehicle. Komyatti filed suit against the City of Indianapolis and Citizens Energy Group. He alleged that the City was negligent in maintaining the street and that Citizens was negligent in allowing coke to clog the storm drains under the railroad bridge, which allegedly contributed to the pothole. The City moved for summary judgment on the basis that Komyatti was contributorily negligent, which is a complete bar to recovery in tort claims against governmental entities. Citizens also moved for summary judgment, asserting that it did not create a dangerous condition, had no duty to maintain the street, and did not proximately cause Komyatti’s injuries. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of both the City and Citizens. Komyatti now appeals. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Kirsch, Mathias, and Crone. [Where: Indiana Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Friday, April 26th
- 10:00 AM - Scott A. Spears v. State of Indiana (55A01-1208-CR-391) Following a jury trial, Scott Speers was convicted of burglary and theft. Speers now appeals and raises the following issues: 1. Did the admission of certain DNA evidence violate the Confrontation Clause of the U.S. Constitution? 2. Did the trial court properly deny Speers’s motion for discharge based on an alleged violation of Speers’s speedy trial rights? 3. Did the trial court properly deny Speers’s motion for a mistrial based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct? The Scheduled Panel Members are Chief Judge Robb, Judges Friedlander, and, Crone. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb, Judges Friedlander and Crone. [Where: Martin University 2171 Avondale Place Indianapolis, Indiana 46218]
Tuesday, April 30th
- 1:30 PM - United States Fidelity Guaranty Co., v. Warsaw Chemical Co. (49A04-1203-CT-97) Appellant Love Jeet Kaur appeals from the trial court’s denial of her motion to dismiss the criminal charges against her: Class D felony dealing in a synthetic cannabinoid, Class D felony possession of a synthetic cannabinoid, and Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance. Kaur argues on appeal that (1) the new Indiana Synthetic Drug Law is unconstitutional on the grounds that it is too vague to serve notice as to what behavior is prohibited and (2) it represents an unconstitutional delegation of authority by the General Assembly because it allows the Indiana Board of Pharmacy to alter the definition of “synthetic drug.” The State argues that (1) Kaur cannot mount a challenge to the Synthetic Drug Law because the drug she is alleged to have possessed and dealt is specifically mentioned in the relevant statutes, (2) the statutes in question are not unconstitutionally vague, and (3) allowing the Indiana Board of Pharmacy to alter the definition of “synthetic drug” is not an unconstitutional delegation of authority. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Najam, Friedlander, and Bradford. [Where: Indiana Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Wednesday, May 1st
- 10:00 AM - McLynnerd Bond, Jr., v. State of Indiana (45A03-1205-CR-212) McLynnerd Bond, Jr. was arrested in the evening of February 12, 2011. The next morning, an officer of the Gary Police Department questioned Bond about the 2007 murder of Kadmiel Mahone. After being interviewed for approximately three hours, Bond admitted he shot Mahone. He was charged with murder. Bond filed a motion to suppress the interview in its entirety, claiming his statement was involuntarily given due to coercive tactics employed by the officer, including “explicit and repeated promises of a family visit once he confessed”; “repeated promises of a better outcome if he confessed”; and “the proffered alternative of facing a racist criminal justice system if he did not confess.” The trial court, though greatly concerned by and strongly discouraging the “suggestion by the detective that the defendant could not receive a fair and impartial jury,” denied the motion to suppress. The trial court certified its order and this court accepted jurisdiction of the interlocutory appeal to address whether the statement, in light of the officer’s questioning, was voluntary.
The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb, Judges Friedlander and Kirsch.
[Where: Ivy Tech-Lafayette]
- 2:00 PM - Lydia Lanni v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, et al (49A05-1208-CT-392) This cause comes before us as a result of a civil tort action filed by Lydia Lanni (Lanni) against the NCAA, the University of Notre Dame, and the United States Fencing Association. Lanni, a spectator, was struck in the left eye by a fencing sabre causing a severe injury while at a purportedly NCAA sanctioned fencing match at Notre Dame. The questions presented to this court focus solely on the procedural posture of the case with respect to the NCAA’s combined motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and/or motion for summary judgment. Specifically, in her argument Lanni relies on the interplay between Ind. Trial Rule 12(B)(6) and Ind. Trial Rule 56. Lanni asserts that the trial court erred by not providing adequate notice that it would treat NCAA’s combined motion as a motion for summary judgment and then refused to give her a “reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56” See T.R. 12(B). In a related argument, Lanni asserts that the trial court erred in denying her motion to stay briefing in order to obtain discovery to respond to NCAA’s motion for summary judgment. Lanni also argues that the trial court erred when it subsequently entered summary judgment in favor of NCAA and denied her request to strike an affidavit, designated by NCAA. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Riley, Bradford, and Brown. [Where: Indiana Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Thursday, May 2nd
- 11:00 AM - Linda Huffman v. Dexter Axle Company and Evans Equipment Company (85A02-1207-CT-586) In this appeal, Linda Huffman, individually and as personal representative of the estate of Jerry Huffman, decedent, allege that Jerry Huffman died as a result of Dexter Axle Company’s negligence. Mr. Huffman, a truck driver for Evans Equipment Company, died while attempting to secure axles on a flatbed trailer located on Dexter’s property. Summary judgment was granted in favor of Dexter Axle Company. Dexter Axle Company has requested that an oral argument be scheduled. Among the questions presented in this appeal are: (1) whether Dexter Axle Company owed a duty of care to Mr. Huffman (2) whether regulations of the United States Department of Transportation preempt those of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration regarding the securing of cargo on trailers; and (3) ultimately whether summary judgment was erroneously granted in favor of Dexter Axle Company. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb, Judges May and Pyle. [Where: Indiana 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 April 22, 2013 06:48 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments