Monday, June 20, 2016
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 6/20/16):
Thursday, June 23 [[Note: This will be Justice Slaughter's first opportunity to hear oral arguments. He was sworn in on June 13th.]
- 9:00 AM - Thomas Todd Reynolds v. Tricia Reynolds (29A04-1505-DR-265) In this post-dissolution proceeding, Father did not provide income documentation in response to Mother’s requests. The Hamilton Superior Court concluded Father violated the provisions of the parties’ dissolution decree and found him in contempt. The Court of Appeals reversed. Reynolds v. Reynolds, No. 29A04-1505-DR-265 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), trans. pending. Mother has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a Feb. 16, 2016 NFP COA decision.
- 9:45 AM - Mary K. Patchett v. Ashley N. Lee (29A04-1501-CT-1) In this personal injury action, the Hamilton Superior Court entered an order in limine prohibiting the defendant from mentioning at trial that the plaintiff’s state-sponsored health insurance plan had paid, and the healthcare providers had accepted, discounted amounts in full satisfaction of the plaintiff’s medical bills. On interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeals accepted jurisdiction and affirmed, concluding Stanley v. Walker, 906 N.E.2d 852 (Ind. 2009), did not apply, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding evidence of the discounted payments is inadmissible under Evidence Rule 403. Patchett v. Lee, 46 N.E.3d 476 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), reh’g denied. The defendant has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a Nov. 19, 2015 COA opinion. Note: according to the docket, several amicus briefs have been filed with the Supreme Court in this case. Unfortunately, all briefs were filed prior to the April 1, 2016 date when briefs became accessible online; the ILB does not have access to them.
- 10:30 AM - L.C. v. Wayne Zollman (10A04-1509-PO-1438) After an evidentiary hearing, the Clark Circuit Court dismissed a request for a protective order, concluding the petitioner had not shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, that stalking or a sex offense occurred sufficient to justify a protective order. Affirming, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court’s order is adequate for appellate review and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing. L.C. v. Wayne Zollman, No. 10A04-1509-PO-1438, 2016 WL 614032 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), trans. pending. The petitioner asks the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal. ILB: This is a Feb. 16, 2016 COA opinion.
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 6/27/16):
Thursday, June 23
- 9:00 AM - Demetrius Holloway v. State of Indiana (71A04-1508-CR-1292) After pleading guilty to operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, Holloway was convicted of intimidation following a bench trial. Holloway appealed, arguing insufficient evidence supports his conviction for intimidation. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals affirmed. Holloway v. State, ___ N.E.3d ___, 2016 WL 659159 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), trans. pending. Holloway has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a 2-1, Feb. 18, 2016 COA opinion. From the dissent: "Being a police officer is often fraught with danger and unpleasantness. But to affirm under these circumstances seems to me perilously close to rendering illusory the right to appeal a conviction such as this."
- 9:45 AM - Demajio Ellis v. State of Indiana (71A05-1511-PC-1845) For his role as an accomplice, Demajio Ellis pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted murder and two counts of attempted robbery, and received a sentence of 100 years with 60 years suspended to probation. The St. Joseph Superior Court denied Ellis’s petition for post-conviction relief. The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding Ellis’s plea was not unreliable. Ellis v. State, No. 71A05-1511-PC-1845 (Ind. Ct. App. March 15, 2016) (mem. dec.), trans. pending. Ellis has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a March 15, 2016 NFP COA decision. From the opinion: "The sole restated issue is whether Ellis consistently denied culpability for the crimes to which he plead guilty, undermining the reliability of his plea and requiring the post-conviction court to vacate it as a matter of law."
- 10:30 AM - Michael Day v. State of Indiana (24A05-1506-CR-724) After a bench trial, the Franklin Circuit Court convicted Michael Day of disorderly conduct. See Ind. Code § 35-45-1-3. A divided Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting Day’s argument that his behavior did not constitute disorderly conduct within the meaning of the statute. Day v. State, 48 N.E.3d 921 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), trans. pending. Day has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal. ILB: This is a 2-1 March 15, 2016 NFP COA decision. From the dissent: "I simply cannot believe that a verbal argument between members of a household, within their own home, can be the sole basis of a criminal conviction for disorderly conduct."
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 6/20/16):
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 6/27/16):
Tuesday, June 28
- 10:30 AM - Santiago Valdez v. State of Indiana (18A02-1509-CR-01514) Santiago Valdez was convicted of attempted rape and confinement. He agreed with the State to admit into evidence his 1993 conviction for a similar offense, believing that it would aid his insanity defense. The parties agreed on a limiting instruction regarding the 1993 conviction, but that instruction was never given to the jury. Also, the trial court did not allow Valdez to admit several documents from that 1993 case that suggested he was mentally ill. Valdez argues that this is particularly unjust since the prosecutor repeatedly claimed that Valdez had no history of mental illness. Finally, during closing arguments, the prosecutor not so subtly hinted that defense counsel instructed one witness on what to say, despite having no evidence that this occurred. Valdez argues that this entitles him to a mistrial. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, Najam and May. [Where: Monroe County Courthouse, Nat U. Hill Courtroom, Bloomington]
- 11:00 AM - Gregg Appliances, Inc., and HHGregg, Inc. v. Dwain Underwood, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated (49A04-1509-PL-1434) Dwain Underwood, as representative of a class of certain management employees, sued HHGregg, Inc. after Gregg declined to play the class members a bonus based on company earnings. The company earnings were at a level that would result in bonuses, but that was because of an insurance payment the company received after its chairman died. Gregg argued it did not have to pay the bonuses because its earnings did not reflect the class members' performance. Gregg appeals a summary judgment for the class. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, May and Brown. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
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 June 20, 2016 08:17 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments