« Ind. Courts - Syrian refugee case oral argument before 7th Circuit this morning | Main | Ind. Courts - "Indiana Ban on Syrian Refugees Draws Mockery From 7th Circuit" »

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 opinion(s) today (and 6 NFP memorandum decision(s))

For publication opinions today (3):

In Meridian Health Services Corporation v. Thomas Martin Bell, a 27-page opinion, Judge Robb writes:

Meridian Health Services Corporation (“Meridian”) appeals the trial court’s order finding it in contempt of court for failure to comply with a subpoena duces tecum and appear at a deposition and awarding attorney’s fees as a sanction pursuant to Indiana Trial Rules 26(C) and 37(A)(4). Concluding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding Meridian in contempt and ordering it to pay attorney’s fees, we affirm. * * *

[A. HIPAA Privacy Rule] Regardless of whether the parent is otherwise considered a personal representative, HIPAA defers to state law with respect to the ability of the parent to obtain health information about the minor child: the health care provider may disclose to a parent the minor’s protected health information to the extent it is permitted or required by state law; conversely, the health care provider may not disclose the information when and to the extent state law prohibits such disclosure. 45 C.F.R. § 164.502(g)(3)(ii)(A), (B). * * *

[B. Indiana Law]

[C. Restrictions on Access]

Conclusion. Because HIPAA permitted and state law clearly required Meridian to release K.B.’s records to Father, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering Meridian pay Father’s attorney’s fees. We therefore affirm.

In Jeffrey L. McMahel v. Mary A. Deaton, a 22-page opinion, Judge Brown writes:
Jeffrey L. McMahel appeals the trial court’s order awarding certain property to Mary A. Deaton following their cohabitation. McMahel raises one issue which we revise and restate as whether the court’s order is clearly erroneous. We affirm. * * *

While Deaton benefited from the resources provided to her by McMahel, McMahel also substantially benefited from the monetary and other contributions provided by Deaton during their cohabitation of over seventeen years. We conclude the evidence supports the trial court’s award of certain property to Deaton and its order that McMahel pay Deaton the amount of $13,102.30. See Turner, 792 N.E.2d at 950-951 (concluding that there was evidence to support the trial court’s finding that defendant had been unjustly enriched).

Conclusion. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the December 11, 2015 order of the trial court.

In Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Golden Foods, Inc., and Lewis R. Coulter, a 28-page opinion, Judge Pyle writes:
Bayview Loan Servicing LLC (“Bayview”) appeals the trial court’s order entering judgment in favor of Golden Foods, Inc., (“Golden Foods”) and Lewis Coulter (“Coulter”) on Bayview’s mortgage foreclosure claim and Golden Food’s conversion counterclaim. Bayview argues that there is insufficient evidence that it intended: (1) for Golden Food’s mortgage to merge with the tax deed that Bayview purchased from M. Jewell, LLC (“Jewell”); and (2) to exert unauthorized control over Golden Foods’ property and monthly payments. Concluding that Bayview’s arguments are requests to reweigh the evidence and that there is sufficient evidence that Bayview intended both the merger and the exercise of unauthorized control, we affirm the trial court. * * *

Our review of the evidence reveals that after Jewell acquired the tax deed to the property, Bayview structured a deal to acquire the property and change Bayview’s status from mortgage lienholder to fee simple owner. Specifically, Leuking drafted a settlement agreement, which Piedra authorized, that passed the tax deed directly to Bayview. Four days later, Gonzalez told Coulter that the Madison Street Property taxes had been paid but failed to mention that Bayview had taken title to the property. In the meantime, Coulter, who believed that Bayview had settled the situation with Jewell and that the LAA was in effect, began making the $1,218.55 monthly payment to Bayview. Although Bayview now held title to the property and had never signed the LAA, Bayview accepted Coulter’s payments for ten months until it filed a complaint to quiet title to the property. This evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion that Bayview converted the Madison Street Property as well as Coulter’s LAA payments. The trial court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous.

NFP civil decisions today (2):

G.S. v. T.K. (mem. dec.)

Angel Hill v. Bradley S. Bergman (mem. dec.)

NFP criminal decisions today (4):

Lamar Crawford v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Denise Stone v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Mitchell Maddox v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Richard L. Boswell, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on September 14, 2016 11:21 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions