Monday, February 27, 2017
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and nextThis week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 2/27/17):
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 was 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.
Thursday, March 9
- 10:30 AM (CST) - Danny Sims v. Andrew Pappas and Melissa Pappas (45S03-1701-CT-00026) Andrew Pappas was injured in a car accident with Danny Sims, who was drunk. Pappas and his wife sued Sims for negligence. Over Sims’ objection, the Lake Superior Court admitted evidence that he had prior alcohol-related driving convictions in 1983 and 1996. A jury awarded the Pappases $2.0 million in damages. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding evidence of Sims’ prior convictions should not have been admitted. Sims v. Pappas, 61 N.E.3d 1285 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
Note: This oral argument will be held in the auditorium on the second floor of the Theodore Roosevelt College and Career Academy, 730 West 25th Avenue, Gary, Indiana 46407 at 10:30 a.m. CST.
ILB: This was a 2-1, 10/13/16 COA opinion authored by J.Shepard. From the dissent: "I cannot agree, however, with the majority’s ultimate conclusion, based on an Ind. Evidence Rule 403 analysis, that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of Sims’s 1983 and 1996 prior alcohol-related offenses."
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 2/27/17):
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]
Tuesday, March 7
- 1:00 PM - City of Indianapolis, et al. v. Richard Kaler (49A04-1604-CT-00865) This case stems from Richard Kaler’s (Kaler) bicycle crash while riding a wooden berm, constructed by the Hoosier Mountain Bike Association (HMBA), at the Town Run Trail Park, which is owned and operated by the City of Indianapolis (the City). The trial court denied HMBA’s and the City’s respective motions for summary judgment. On appeal, the HMBA and the City present the following issues for review: Whether the trial court erred in denying summary judgment in light of Pfenning v. Lineman, 947 N.E.2d 392 (Ind. 2011) and its progeny; Whether Kaler failed to exercise the necessary degree of care and admitted to his contributory negligence as a matter of law; and Whether Kaler designated proper and sufficient evidence in opposition to the motions for summary judgment. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Riley, Crone and Altice. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
- 10:00 AM - Roy A. DeFries, et al. v. Board of COmmissioners of Posey County, et al. (65A05-1508-MI-01249) This case involves a challenge to the Posey County Board of Commissioners’ decision to vacate a public road. On appeal, a group of remonstrators argue that the decision must be set aside because the Commissioners failed to hold a hearing within thirty days as required by statute and because the decision was arbitrary, capricious, and unsupported by the evidence. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Robb, Crone and Altice. [Where: DePauw University, Greencastle]
- 10:30 AM - Town of Clear Lake v. Hoagland Family Limited Partnership (76A05-1606-PL-01241) This case involves the Town of Clear Lake attempting to compel Dan Hoagland to connect three of his properties to its sewer system. The Town points to Indiana statutes that give municipalities the authority to compel connection and punish a failure to connect (the Town’s municipal code sets the penalty at $500 per day per property, which at the time of the trial court’s last hearing amounted to $2.9 million). Hoagland responds that the municipality is only authorized to compel his connection if there is an “available” sewer, and several town officials testified that no one could connect to the sewer until after the Town had installed a grinder pump on the property. In turn, the Town argues that Hoagland should have submitted a plan for how he would connect to the sewer, and only then could the Town know where to put the grinder pump. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, Mathias and Pyle. [Where: Supreme Court 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 February 27, 2017 08:07 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments