Wednesday, January 06, 2016
Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court decides one today [Updated]
In R.E. v. M.S., a single paragraph, per curiam opinion, the Court writes in full:
R.E. appealed the trial court’s issuance of a protective order against her in favor of M.S. The Court of Appeals affirmed in a memorandum decision. Among other things, R.E. requested that the Court of Appeals redact her full name from its decision, and identify her by initials only. The Court of Appeals denied her requests. R.E. seeks transfer, which we now grant for the purpose of substituting R.E.’s name with her initials in our opinion. In all other respects we summarily affirm the Court of Appeals’ decision. See Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A)(2).ILB: Here are the 7/17/2015 and 9/1/2015 COA orders on the "Appellant's Motion to Substitute Appellant's Name with Initials" and the "Motion to Reconsider" same, respectively. The latter states in full:
Appellant, by counsel, has filed a Motion to Reconsider and Ammend [sic] and Redact Appellant’s Full Name in the Memorandum Decision Issued June 12, 2015, Pursuant to Statute and Administrative Rule 9.[Updated] ILB: Supreme Court does not cite basis in statute or court rule for redaction of defendant's name in a protective order case.
Having reviewed the matter, the Court finds and orders as follows:Appellant’s Motion to Reconsider and Ammend [sic] and Redact Appellant’s Full Name in the Memorandum Decision Issued June 12, 2015 is denied.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 6, 2016 02:24 PM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions