Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 opinion(s) today (and 16 NFP memorandum decision(s))
For publication opinions today (3):
In In re the 2014 Johnson Co. Tax Sale, Town of Edinburgh v. Patrick Black, Johnson Co. Auditor, and Johnson Co. Treasurer, a 14-page opinion, Judge Brown writes:
The Town of Edinburgh (the “Town”) appeals from the trial court’s Order Denying Issuance of Tax Deed. The Town raises four issues which we consolidate and restate as whether the court’s order is clearly erroneous. We affirm.In I.A.E., Inc. and William Lazarus, a 39-page opinion, Judge Riley writes:
Appellants-Defendants/Cross-Appellees, I.A.E., Inc. (IAE) and William Lazarus (Attorney Lazarus) appeal the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Appellees-Plaintiffs/Cross-Appellants, Edward R. Hall (Attorney Hall) and Gerald M. Bishop (Attorney Bishop), awarding them attorney fees and expenses arising from their representation of IAE in the underlying cause against the Board of Works of the City of Lake Station (Lake Station). We reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand. * * *In Melissa Capellari v. Gino Capellari, an 8-page opinion, Judge Bailey writes:
Based on the foregoing, we reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment with respect to Attorney Hall’s and Attorney Lazarus’ attorney fees based on res judicata grounds but affirm the trial court’s calculation of Attorney Bishop’s attorney fees pursuant to the guidelines in Galanis and the trial court’s grant of expenses. We affirm the trial court’s grant of abuse of process claim; and also conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion granting the motion to strike. On Cross-Appeal, we deny appellate attorney fees to Attorney Bishop and Attorney Hall.
Melissa Capellari (“Mother”) and Gino Capellari (“Father”) divorced. The trial court included as part of its order upon final dissolution of the marriage a settlement agreement (“the Agreement”) that provided for child support,parenting time, and other matters. The Agreement also included a fee-shifting provision.NFP civil decisions today (4):
Father subsequently sought modification of his parenting time and child support from that provided for by the Agreement. Mother responded and requested payment of attorney fees if Father’s requests were denied. The trial court subsequently denied Father’s requests. The court also denied Mother’s request for payment of attorney fees based upon its construction of the fee-shifting provision. Mother filed a motion to correct error, which the trial court also denied. Mother now appeals. * * *
The fee-shifting provision at issue here, construed as Mother suggests, would serve to penalize any unsuccessful effort at the modification of parenting time or child support. This outcome creates a significant disincentive for parents to seek additional parenting time with their children, and seems at odds with this state’s public policy concerning the primacy of the best interest of the child with respect both to parenting time and child support. See id. at 1107. Here, however, the trial court was within the law and its discretion in interpreting its own order and reaching its conclusion denying Mother’s request for attorney fees. Affirmed.
Crone, J., concurs.
Vaidik, C.J., concurs in result without separate opinion.
NFP criminal decisions today (12):
Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 22, 2015 11:23 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions