Attorneys for Smith
Matthew Soliday
James Tsoutsoris
Valparaiso, IN
Attorney for State
Jodi Kathryn Stein
Indianapolis, IN
Thursday, November 4, 2004
9:45 a.m. Brownsburg Community School Corp. v. Natare Corp .
The Marion Superior Court denied Brownsburg Community School Corporations motion for judgment on
the pleadings, which alleged that Brownsburg Community School Corporation was not a person
subject to suit under Indianas antitrust statutes. The Court of Appeals affirmed
in Brownsburg School Corp. v. Natare Corp., 808 N.E.2d 148 (Ind. Ct. App.
2004), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the
case, thus vacating the Court of Appeals opinion, and has assumed jurisdiction over
this appeal.
Attorney for Appellant
James Stephenson
Indianapolis, IN
Attorney for Appellee
Thomas Pastore
Indianapolis, IN
Thursday, November 4, 2004
10:30 a.m. Stephen Cox v. William Paul,
The Coxes filed a medical malpractice complaint against Paul and filed a motion
for partial summary judgment, asking the St. Joseph Circuit Court to find as
a matter of law that Paul violated his duty to warn Ms. Cox
about potential defects in her dental implants. The trial court denied the
motion for partial summary judgment. In this interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeals
reversed and remanded for an entry granting the motion for partial summary judgment.
Cox v. Paul, 805 N.E.2d 901 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), vacated.
The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer, thus vacating the opinion
of the Court of Appeals, and has assumed jurisdiction over this appeal.
Attorneys for the Cox
Edmond Foley
Douglas Small
South Bend, IN
Attorneys for Paul
Elizabeth Knotts
Rori Goldman
Indianapolis, IN
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
9:00 a.m.
Bruce G. Heath v. State
After a jury found appellant guilty of criminal recklessness, the Noble Circuit Court
entered judgment of conviction as a Class D felony and sentenced appellant to
two and one-half years. The Court of Appeals affirmed in Heath v.
State, No. 57A04-0307-CR-371 (Ind. Ct. App. June 16, 2004) (unpublished Memorandum Decision), vacated.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. The oral argument will focus on issues relating to Blakely
v. Washington, 124 S.Ct. 2531 (2004).
Attorney for Heath Attorneys for State
Lorraine Rodts Steve Carter
Bloomington, IN Matthew Fisher
Indianapolis, IN
Adolphe Smylie v. State
Appellant pleaded guilty to two counts of child solicitation as a Class D
felony, and the Johnson Superior Court sentenced appellant to three and one-half years.
The Court of Appeals affirmed in Smylie v. State, no. 41A01-0309-CR-339 (Ind.
Ct. App. April 13, 2004) (unpublished Memorandum Decision), 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.
The oral argument will focus on issues relating to Blakely v. Washington, 124
S.Ct. 2531 (2004).
Attorneys for Smylie Attorneys for State
Robert Hammerle Steve Carter
Joseph Cleary Grant Carlton
Indianapolis, IN Indianapolis, IN
Thursday, November 18, 2004
4:30 p.m.
John P. Myers v. State will be held in
New Albany, Indiana at the Grand Theatre.
The Scott Superior Court denied the defendants motion to suppress a handgun seized
during a warrantless search of his vehicle. On interlocutory appeal, the Court
of Appeals affirmed in Myers v. State, 806 N.E.2d 350 (Ind. Ct. App.
2004), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted defendants petition to transfer the
case, thus vacating the Court of Appeals opinion, and has assumed jurisdiction over
this appeal.
Attorneys for Myers
Thomas Lantz
Ryan Redmon
Seymour, IN
Attorney for State
Christopher LaFuse
Indianapolis, IN
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
9:00 a.m. Nagy v. Evansville-Vanderburgh School Corp.
When parents of school children sued as a class for an injunction and
a declaration that the School Corporations mandatory $20 per student fee is unconstitutional,
the Vanderburgh Superior Court ruled on cross-motions for summary judgment that the fee
does not violate Indiana Constitution, Article 8, § 1 (tuition shall be without
charge). The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded after concluding that the
parents were entitled to summary judgment because the fee violates Article 8, §
1 of the Indiana Constitution. Nagy v. EvansvilleVanderburgh School Corp., 808 N.E.2d
1221 (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.
Attorneys for Frank Nagy, et al
Jacquelyn Bowie Suess
Kenneth Falk
Indianapolis, IN
Attorneys for Evansville Vanderburgh School Corp.
Patrick Shoulders
Robert Burkart
Evansville, IN
Attorney for Amicus Curiae, the Indiana School Boards Association
Lisa Tanselle
Indianapolis, IN
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
10:05 a.m. Donna J. MacLafferty v. William P. MacLafferty
In this dissolution case, the Marion Superior Court granted a fathers petition to
modify his child support obligation. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that
the trial court did not err in reducing the father's support obligation based
only on the mother's increased income. MacLafferty v. MacLafferty, 811 N.E.2d 450
(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 Appellant
Bryan Lee Ciyou
Indianapolis, IN
Attorney for Appellee
Michael Cheerva
Indianapolis, IN
T
uesday, November 23, 2004
10:50 a.m. (In re Guidant Corporation), Ritter v. Dollens
The United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, has certified
a question of state law to the Indiana Supreme Court. The question
is:
Under Indiana Code § 23-1-32-2, regarding futility, by what legal standard should a
court evaluate a shareholders decision not to make demand to a public corporations
board of directors before filing a derivative suit?
The Supreme Court has accepted and will answer the question.