« Ind. Gov't. - "Conflicting state and federal policies will likely cost Indiana same-sex couples more when they file their tax returns this year, experts say" | Main | Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 7 NFP) »

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Ind. Decisions - Two today from the Supreme Court

In State of Indiana v. Adrian Lotaki, a 4-page per curiam opinion where "This award of credit time with respect to a mandatory consecutive sentence was error, and conflicts with our precedent," the Court grants transfer and remands the case:

... to the trial court with instructions to re-evaluate the award of credit time consistent with this opinion, and to re-sentence Lotaki. The trial court may discharge this responsibility by (1) issuing a new sentencing order without taking any further action, (2) ordering additional briefing on sentencing and then issuing a new order without holding a new sentencing hearing, or (3) ordering a new sentencing hearing at which additional factual submissions are either allowed or disallowed and then issuing a new order based on the presentations of the parties.
In Bonnie Moryl, as Surviving Spouse and Personal Representative of the Estate of Richard A. Moryl v. Carey B. Ransone, M.D., La Porte Hospital, Dawn Forney, RN, Wanda Wakeman, RN BSBA, et al., a 7-page, 5-0 opinion, Chief Justice Dickson writes:
This case presents a question of first impression: whether, under Indiana's Medical Malpractice Act, a proposed medical malpractice complaint is considered "filed" upon deposit with a private delivery service or upon receipt. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment, finding that such proposed complaint is filed upon receipt. We now grant transfer and hold that the commencement of a medical malpractice action occurs when a copy of the proposed complaint is deposited for mailing by registered or certified mail or by certain pri-vate delivery services and that the plaintiff's action was timely filed in this case. * * *

For these reasons, we conclude that the plaintiff's medical malpractice action was timely filed. We reverse the grant of the defendants' motions for summary judgment asserting the stat-ute of limitations and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. As to all other claims, we summarily affirm the Court of Appeals.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on March 11, 2014 12:23 PM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions