Monday, May 11, 2015
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 5/11/15):
- 9:00 AM - Huntington National Bank v. Car-X Associations Corp. (64S04-1504-MF-187) The Porter Superior Court granted Car-X Associates Corporation a default judgment and later denied Huntington National Bank’s motion to set aside that default. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. Huntington Nat’l Bank v. Car-X Assocs. Corp., 22 N.E.3d 687 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), 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 Dec. 2, 2014 COA opinion (1st case) that held: "Finding that Huntington has established that it was entitled to relief from the default judgment by demonstrating excusable neglect and a meritorious defense, we conclude the trial court abused its discretion in denying Huntington’s Trial Rule 60(B)(1) motion to set aside the default judgment."
- 9:45 AM - SCI Propane, LLC v. Courtney Frederick (55A04-1211-PL-586) After Stephen Frederick was killed in a residential propane gas explosion, leaving a surviving spouse and dependent child, his Estate brought a claim against several defendants under the General Wrongful Death Statute, Indiana Code section 34-23-1-1. Following a jury trial and settlements, the Estate received an award of damages, and in subsequent proceedings, the Morgan Superior Court awarded attorney fees to the Estate. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding the General Wrongful Death Statute permitted an award of attorney fees where the decedent left dependents, but determining the award should be limited to the amount of fees the plaintiff actually incurred. SCI Propane, LLC v. Frederick, 15 N.E.3d 1015 (Ind. 2014), reh’g denied, trans. pending. Both parties have petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was an August 13, 2014 COA opinion.
- 10:30 AM - JP Morgan Chase Bank v. Claybridge Homeowners Assoc. (29S02-1504-MF-188) After the homeowners association filed this foreclosure action and a notice of lis pendens, the Hamilton Superior Court granted a judgment to the homeowners association and denied the bank’s subsequent motion to intervene. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, concluding the bank was entitled to intervene and its motion was timely. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Claybridge Homeowners Ass’n, Inc., 19 N.E.3d 324 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was an Oct. 22, 2014 COA opinion (4th case), holding: "Based upon the record and under the circumstances, and keeping in mind that the timeliness requirement should not be employed as a tool to sanction prospective intervenors but to insure the original parties are not prejudiced by an intervenor’s failure to apply sooner, we conclude that the JPMorgan as the prospective intervenor met its burden under Trial Rule 24(A) and that its motion was not untimely. "
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 5/11/15):
Thursday, May 14
- 10:00 AM - Merrillville 2548 Inc. v. BMO Harris Bank (45A03-1409-MF-345) In 2006, MCSS Merrilville, L.L.C. (“Borrower”), executed a promissory note (“the Note”) and leasehold mortgage (“the Mortgage”) as security for the note in favor of Amcore Bank, N.A., who at some point assigned the debt and mortgage to Appellant-Plaintiff BMO Harris Bank, N.A., (“BMO Harris”). Borrower had entered into a lease (“the Lease”) for real property in Century Plaza in Merrillville (“the Parcel”), on which it operated a Golden Corral restaurant. Since 2007, however, Appellee-Intervenor GC 2548, Inc. (“GC 2548”), has actually operated the restaurant, although it has never been made party to the Lease and there is no evidence of any assignment of rights under the Lease from Borrower to GC 2548. In 2013, BMO Harris sued Borrower and various guarantors for breach of contract (i.e., the Note), foreclosure, and appointment of a receiver. In May of 2013, GC 2548 moved to intervene, claiming tenancy and a possessory interest in the Parcel. Eventually, BMO Harris moved for default judgment against Borrower and all but one of the guarantors and for an order of possession of the leasehold interest. In August of 2014, the trial court entered default judgment against Borrower and all but one of the guarantors and ruled that any right to possession by any of those parties was barred. The trial court ultimately ruled that (1) BMO Harris’s default judgment against Borrower entitled it to foreclose on its interest in the Parcel, (2) Article 9 of the Indiana UCC dictated the result of this case and not Indiana Code provisions governing mortgage foreclosure actions, and (3) GC 2548 was bound by the default judgment against the defendants and was given thirty days to vacate the Parcel. On appeal, GC 2548 contends that (1) the trial court erred in concluding that Article 9 applied, (2) GC 2548 is an equitable assignee of Borrower’s Lease, and (3) the equitable assignment of the Lease terminated BMO Harris’s security interest. BMO Harris counters that (1) GC 2548 waived certain arguments (2) GC 2548 was bound by the default judgment against defendants, (3) Article 9 of the UCC applies, (4) GC 2548 is not entitled to equitable relief, (5) the trial court correctly entered its order of possession in favor of BMO Harris. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Vaidik, Judges Kirsch and Bradford. [Where:Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 5/18/15):
Monday, May 18
- 2:00 PM - Whistle Stop Inn et al v. City of Indianapolis et al (49A02-1407-MI-519) Whistle Stop Inn, Inc. and Louise Liford d/b/a Thirsty Turtle (collectively, the appellants) appeal the trial court's denial of their motion for judgment on the pleadings as well as the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the City of Indianapolis, Mayor Greg Ballard, and the Indianapolis City County Council (collectively, the City) and partial summary judgment in favor of Hoosier Park LLC. The appellants argue that certain exceptions to Indianapolis Municipal Code section 616-201, which prohibits smoking in public places, violate the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Indiana Constitution. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, Najam and Friedlander. [Where: 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 May 11, 2015 08:25 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments