Tuesday, September 06, 2016
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 9/5/16):
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 9/12/16):
Tuesday, Septemeber 13
- 9:00 AM - Marvin Beville v. State of Indiana (84S01-1606-CR-00347) During discovery, the State allowed defense counsel to review a video recording of an alleged drug transaction between the defendant and a confidential informant, but the State would not provide counsel with a copy of the video to review with the defendant. The trial court denied defendant’s motion to compel discovery of the video recording. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals affirmed on interlocutory appeal. Beville v. State (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), 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 NFP COA ruling from March 29, 2016 that was later designated "for publication" - a snippet from the dissent:
The majority finds, as argued by the State, that “after watching the video [Beville] will learn the identity of the CI.” Slip op. at 7. However, other than the State’s mere assertion, the record does not support such a conclusion. The record does not reveal that the trial court examined the video and made such a finding, and the record on appeal does not contain a copy of the video.
- 9:45 AM - ESPN, Inc., et al. v. University of Notre Dame Police Department (71S05-1606-MI-00359) A journalist and her employer filed this action seeking disclosure of certain records from a private university’s police department, and the St. Joseph Superior Court entered judgment in favor of the police department. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding the police department to be a “law enforcement agency” subject to Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act, Indiana Code sections 5-14-3-1 through -10. ESPN, Inc. and Paula Lavigne v. Univ. of Notre Dame Security Police Dep’t., 50 N.E.3d 385 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: this was the March 15, 2016 COA opinion concluding that the Notre Dame Police Department does qualify as a “public agency” under APRA. See also this May 11, 2016 ILB post and this ILB list of other posts.
- 10:30 AM - In re the Adoption of S.Z.; R.W. v. C.G. (49A05-1504-AD-00163) R.W. filed a petition for adoption of minor child S.Z. in Marion Superior Court, arguing that C.G. (Mother) waived consent to the adoption by refusing to provide financial support for S.Z. for at least one year before the petition was filed. Marion Superior Court held that Mother’s consent was required, as she had provided support by purchasing clothes and other items for S.Z. during this time. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine whether adoption by R.W. was in S.Z.’s best interest. In re the Adoption of S.Z., No. 49A05-1504-AD-163 (Ind. Ct. App. February 3, 2016) (mem. dec.), reh’g denied, trans. pending. R.W. has petitioned this court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal. ILB: This is a February 3, 2016 NFP COA decision.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 9/5/16):
Thursday, September 8
- 1:30 PM - Don Gunderson, et al, v. State of Indiana, et al, (46A03-1508-PL-01116) This case addresses who owns land along the Lake Michigan shoreline. A landowner, Gunderson, sought a declaratory judgment that his property extended to the water's edge and the public had no rights to land not covered by water. The State and intervenors argued the State holds land up to the ordinary high water mark, even when it is not covered by water, and holds it in trust for the public. The trial court granted summary judgment for the State, and further held the ordinary high water mark is determined by an administrative regulation. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, May and Brown. [Where: Supreme Court Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 9/12/16):
Tuesday, September 13
- 11:00 AM - McKeen v. Turner (53A05-1511-CT-02047) Billy Turner sued Dr. Charles McKeen after Turner’s wife died while under Dr. McKeen’s medical care. Dr. McKeen filed a motion to strike one of Turner’s expert witnesses, arguing that the expert would present evidence regarding a breach of care that was not presented to the medical review panel. The trial court denied the motion to strike, and Dr. McKeen now brings this interlocutory appeal of that ruling. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Vaikik, Judges Baker and Najam. [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 September 6, 2016 09:39 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments