Monday, February 20, 2017
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and nextThis week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 2/20/17):
Thursday, February 23
- 9:00 AM - Gregg Appliances, Inc. and HH Gregg, Inc. v. Dwaine Underwood, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated (49S02-1701-PL-00025) Senior managers of Gregg Appliances filed a class action alleging they are owed bonuses for fiscal year 2012 because Gregg agreed to pay bonuses based on a measure that includes Gregg’s one-time receipt of life insurance proceeds. On the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, the Marion Superior Court denied Gregg’s motion and granted the managers’ motion. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded with instructions to enter summary judgment for Gregg. Gregg Appliances, Inc. v. Underwood, 57 N.E.3d 831 (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 7/22/16 COA opinion re calculation of bonuses. COA reversed trial court and granted summary judgment for Gregg.
- 9:45 AM - Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission v. Spirited Sales, Inc. (49S00-1611-PL-00614) Spirited Sales, LLC applied for a permit to wholesale liquor in Indiana. The Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission denied Spirited’s application on the basis it would create a prohibited interest in conflict with Indiana Code section 7.1-5-9-4. The Marion Superior Court reversed, and ordered the Commission to issue Spirited’s permit. The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer pursuant to Appellate Rule 56(A) and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: The Supreme Court granted Emergency (56A)transfer of the trial court decision on Nov. 22, 2016. Justice Massa did not participate. For more information, see these Aug. 29th and a second Aug. 29th ILB posts, the latter of which includes the trial court ruling.
Thursday, March 2
- 9:00 AM - William Taylor v. State of Indiana (06A01-1511-PC-01876) A Boone County jury convicted William Taylor of two counts of Class A felony child molesting, and he received an eighty-year sentence. Taylor’s conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. On Taylor’s petition for post-conviction relief, the Boone Circuit Court found his trial counsel rendered deficient performance for failing to communicate a plea offer to Taylor, but denied post-conviction relief, finding Taylor suffered no prejudice from counsel’s failure. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Taylor v. State, No. 06A01-1511-PC-1876 (Ind. Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2016). Taylor has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal. ILB: This is an Oct. 28, 2016 NFP COA opinion.
- 9:45 AM - T.A. v. State of Indiana (49S04-1702-JV-00069) T.A. petitioned to expunge records from six juvenile delinquency petitions created between 2008 and 2013. After his expungement petition had been filed, but before the scheduled hearing, the State filed a new criminal charge against T.A. The Marion Superior Court then denied the expungement because of this pending criminal charge. A unanimous panel of the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the plain language of Indiana Code section 35-38-9-1 required the trial court to consider the merits of the expungement petition only as of the filing date. T.A. v. State, 62 N.E.3d 436 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). The Indiana Supreme Court has granted transfer pursuant to Appellate Rule 56(A) and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was an Oct. 19, 2016 COA opinion (3rd case) re whether the juvenile court was permitted to consider T.A.’s post-petition criminal charge in granting a petition for expungement. The now-vacated COA opinion reversed the denial. The Supreme Court granted Emergency (56A) transfer of the trial court decision on Feb. 9, 2017.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 2/20/17):
Friday, February 24
- 12:00 PM - Elizabeth (Newman) Lewis v. David Newman (67A05-1609-DR-01981) When the marriage of David Newman and Elizabeth Newman (now Lewis) was dissolved in 2008, the trial court incorporated the parties’ property settlement agreement which provided, in relevant part, that David would pay spousal maintenance in a fixed amount each month to Elizabeth until Elizabeth either remarries or becomes eligible to receive payments from David’s retirement account, whichever occurs first. The agreement also provided that in addition to the $1,000.00 per month spousal maintenance payment, Elizabeth was entitled to 25% of the net profits of David’s book royalties. In 2016, David filed a motion to terminate his spousal maintenance obligation, alleging Elizabeth had remarried. Elizabeth agreed the $1,000 monthly payment should be terminated, but disagreed the book royalty payments constituted spousal maintenance that should also be terminated. The trial court first issued an order terminating David’s $1,000 monthly obligation but ordering the book royalty payments to continue. David filed a motion to correct error following which the trial court issued a corrected order also terminating the book royalty payments. Elizabeth now appeals, arguing the trial court improperly modified the parties’ property settlement agreement when it determined the book royalties were to be considered spousal maintenance rather than a distinct category of property. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, Robb, and Barnes. [Where: Culver Cove Resort, Culver, IN]
Thursday, March 2
- 1:00 PM - Louis Bell v. State of Indiana (49A05-1606-CR-01390) Officer Justin Gough observed Louis Bell riding his bicycle while trailing another bicycle by holding its handlebars. Neither bicycle had proper lighting. Officer Gough asked Bell if he could talk to him, and Bell complied. After observing a bulge in Bell’s front pocket and a screwdriver in his back pocket, Officer Gough performed a pat down on Bell. Officer Gough discovered a handgun and several types of drugs and related paraphernalia. Bell did not have a license for the gun. The State charged Bell with Level 4 felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, Level 6 possession of a narcotic drug, Level 5 possession of cocaine, Class B misdemeanor possession of marijuana, and Class C misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia. Bell filed a motion to suppress evidence, arguing the pat-down was unconstitutional. The trial court denied the motion and found Bell guilty as charged by a bench trial. Bell appeals his conviction, asserting the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion to suppress. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Kirsch, May and Robb. [Where: Ivy Tech Community College, Lafayette, IN]
- 11:00 AM - Warner, et al. v. Chauffeurs, Teamsters & Helpers Local Union No. 414 (02A04-1608-PL-02017) In 2015, the Drivers filed a complaint in the trial court against SRM and the Union, alleging that the Union was receiving their union dues in violation of Indiana’s right-to-work law (“the Act”) and seeking recovery of dues already paid under a theory of money had and received. At the same time, Plaintiff Warner filed a claim of unfair labor practice with the NLRB. In June of 2016, the NLRB dismissed Warner’s claim. In July of 2016, the trial court dismissed the Drivers’ claims, ruling that (1) they had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because although the Act had rendered the union security clause in the CBA null and void, it did not affect their previously-executed dues check-off authorizations and (2) their claims were preempted by federal law in any case. The Drivers contend on appeal that the trial court erred in granting the Union’s motion to dismiss because they were not required to prove the existence of a union security clause in order to maintain their cause of action and the relevant federal law contains exceptions for state-enacted right-to-work laws. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Najam, May and Bradford. [Where: Indiana University Maurer School of Law, Moot Court Room, Bloomington, IN]
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 February 20, 2017 08:00 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments