COMPLETE
SEPTEMBER 2004 SITTING

OF THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT


Thursday, September 9, 2004

9:00 a.m. John Thomas Sees V. Bank One, Indiana, N.A.

The Huntington Circuit Court granted a bank’s motion for summary judgment against an alleged guarantor. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the guarantor’s affirmative defenses were barred by the Indiana Lender Liability Act. See Sees v. Bank One, Indiana, N.A., 804 N.E.2d 227 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case, vacating the opinion of the Court of Appeals, and has assumed jurisdiction over this appeal.

                     Attorney for Sees
                    John Thomas Sees
                    Huntington, IN

                     Attorney for Bank One
                    Martin E. Seifert
                    Lori W. Jansen
                    Fort Wayne, IN 46802


Thursday, September 9, 2004

9:45 a.m.     Michael Johnson v. State of Indiana

Appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief alleged that he had been denied effectie assistance of trial counsel. The Marion Superior Court denied appellant’s petition. The Court of Appeals affirmed in Michael Johnson v. State, No. 49G01-9703-PC-42739 (Ind. Jan. 16, 2004) (unpublished memorandum decision), trans. pending. Appellant has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.

                     Attorney for Johnson
                    John R. Maley
                    Indianapolis, IN

                     Attorney for State
                    Christopher L. Lafuse
                    Indianapolis, IN



Thursday, September 16, 2004

9:00 a.m. Hyundai Motor America, Inc. v. Sandra Goodin

The Vanderburgh Superior Court instructed the jury on implied warranties. The jury returned a verdict for Goodin and against Hyundai Motor America, and the court entered a judgment in Goodin’s favor. The Court of Appeals reversed. Hyundai Motor America, Inc. v. Goodin, 804 N.E.2d 775 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted Goodin’s petition to transfer the case, thus vacating the Court of Appeals opinion, and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.

                     Attorney for Hyundai
                    Julia Blackwell Gelinas
                    Robert B. Thornburg
                    Indianapolis, IN.

                     Attorneys for Goodin
                    Scott M. Cohen
                    John D. Barker
                    Chicago, IL.



Thursday, September 16, 2004

9:45 a.m. Brenna Guy v. State of Indiana


The Marion Superior Court denied appellant’s motion to suppress the results of a breath test, which test was taken while appellant has a metal stud in her tongue. The Court of Appeals reversed in this interlocutory appeal. See Guy v. State, 805 N.E.2d 835 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case, thus vacating the opinion of the Court of Appeals, and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.

                     Attorney for Guy
                    Robert W. Hammerle
                    Joseph M Cleary
                    Indianapolis, IN

                     Attorney for State
                    Justin F. Roebel
                    Indianapolis, IN

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

9:00 a.m. Gene Lasater v. Donald House

In this will contest alleging undue influence, the Delaware Circuit Court ruled in favor of the estate on several evidentiary issues. A divided Court of Appeals reversed in part, holding that some hearsay statements by the decedent could be admissible to establish her state of mind. Lasater v. House, 805 N.E.2d 824 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). The estate has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.

                     Attorney for Appellant
                    Donald McClellan
                    Muncie, IN

                     Attorneys for Appellee
                    P. Gregory Cross
                    Muncie, IN

John Cook
                    Winchester, IN

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

9:45 a.m. Northrop v. General Motors     

This is a dispute between a contractor and a subcontractor arising from a contract for development of an aircraft component. The trial court entered judgment on a jury verdict for the subcontractor of approximately $68 million. The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding sufficient evidence to support the verdict and no reversible error in the jury instructions. See Northrop Corp. v. General Motors Corp., 807 N.E.2d 70 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), trans. pending. The contractor has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.

                     Attorneys for Northrop Corp.
                    Douglas King
                    Andrew McNeil
                    Bryan Babb
                    Sandra Perry
                    Indianapolis, IN

                    George Patton
                    Washington, DC

                    Paul Malingagio
                    Joseph Coyne
                    Los Angeles, CA

                     Attorneys for GE Allison
                    Joseph Yeager
                    Terrill Albright
                    Indianapolis, IN
                    
                    Scott Pickens
                    John Lloyd
Anthony Trenga
Washington, DC