« Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit posts four today | Main | Environment - [Updated] No more stringent: now you see it, now you don't »

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals posts four today

KLLM, Inc. and Keith James Pierce v. LaCrecia E. Legg, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Mark S. Hanna, and Laura Brewer (4/27/05 IndCtApp) [Guest Statute]
Robb, Judge

Mark Hanna died as a result of injuries he sustained when Keith Pierce struck Hanna while Hanna was assisting Pierce in backing up a semi tractor-trailer combination that Pierce was driving on behalf of KLLM, Inc. Pierce and KLLM, Inc. (collectively, “KLLM”) filed a declaratory judgment action to determine whether Indiana’s Guest Statute, Indiana Code section 34-30-11-1, barred any claim that Hanna’s estate, by LaCrecia Legg as the estate’s personal representative, and Laura Brewer, Hanna’s mother, might have against KLLM. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment, and Legg and Brewer (collectively, “Legg”) filed a Trial Rule 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss. The trial court denied all motions and subsequently entered final judgment in favor of Legg, finding that Indiana’s Guest Statute did not apply to the case at hand. KLLM now appeals. * * *

The trial court correctly concluded that Hanna was a hitchhiker under Indiana’s Guest Statute at the time of his death but erred in finding that Hanna was not “in or upon” the vehicle. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s denial of KLLM’s motion for summary judgment and remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Also, because we hold that the declaratory judgment action was appropriate, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the declaratory action to proceed. Thus, we affirm the trial court’s denial of Legg’s motion to dismiss.
Affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.
RILEY, J., and CRONE, J., concur


Northern Indiana Public Service Company v. Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor and NIPSCO Industrial Group (4/27/05 IndCtApp) [Utility Law]
Baker, Judge
Appellant-petitioner Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) appeals a ruling from the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (Commission) claiming that an order issued by that agency disallowing NIPSCO’s proposed use of a deferred accounting method for new costs it will incur to deliver electricity to retail customers was not supported by the evidence and is contrary to law. Specifically, NIPSCO claims that the Commission erred in determining that the proposed accounting method violated a settlement agreement that NIPSCO had negotiated with several of the parties to this appeal, including the Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (OUCC), and the NIPSCO Industrial Group. Concluding that the Commission properly denied NIPSCO’s request to use a deferred accounting method with respect to its new costs, we affirm. * * *
KIRSCH, C.J., and BARNES, J., concur
In the Matter of C.C. (4/27/05 IndCtApp) [Juvenile Law]

David Jeffrey Lee v. State of Indiana (4/27/05 IndCtApp) [Criminal Law & Procedure]
MATHIAS, Judge

David Lee’s (“Lee”) Motion to Suppress was denied in the Superior Court of Lake County. Lee appeals, raising the following two restated issues for review: [1] Whether the Indiana Constitution permitted the police, without first obtaining a search warrant, to view videotapes that were previously viewed by Lee’s fiancée; and,[2] Whether the Fourth Amendment permitted the police, without first obtaining a search warrant, to view videotapes that were not previously viewed by Lee’s fiancée.

Concluding the police were only permitted to view the videotapes that had already been viewed by Lee’s fiancée, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
BAILEY, J., and SULLIVAN, J., concur

Edward Jackson v. State of Indiana (4/27/05 IndCtApp) [Criminal Law & Procedure]

Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 27, 2005 01:51 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions