« Courts - Briscoe v. Virginia oral argument this morning before SCOTUS | Main | Ind. Law - What is the genesis of SB 60? »

Monday, January 11, 2010

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 6 NFP)

For publication opinions today (1):

In Northwest Towing & Recovery v. State of Indiana , a 14-page opinion, Chief Judge Baker writes:

Sometimes actions that are merely tangential in nature can produce Solomonic judicial actions and results. Today we are called upon to review the resolution of a dispute regarding a vehicle that was towed to and stored at Northwest Towing & Recovery’s (Northwest) facility at the Muncie Police Department’s request following a deadly traffic accident that ultimately resulted in a criminal conviction against the driver of the vehicle. The vehicle’s owner, who was not a party to the criminal proceedings, requested the return of the vehicle, and Northwest sought to recover its unpaid storage fees in excess of $3600.

Appellant, Northwest appeals the denial of its motion to correct error after the trial court limited its storage-fee lien to $1500 in accordance with Indiana Code section 32-33-10-5(b) against appellee Frances Brinkley, the owner of the vehicle. Specifically, Northwest maintains that the judgment must be set aside because Frances was not the “real party in interest” in accordance with Indiana Trial Rule 17(A). Northwest also asserts that it had a lien on the vehicle pursuant to Indiana Code section 9-22-5-15, exclusive of the limiting provisions of Indiana Code section 32-33-10-5(b), and that the trial court’s order requiring it to transfer the title back to Frances violated its due process rights. Frances cross appeals, claiming that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering her to pay anything for the return of her vehicle.

Concluding that the trial court properly ordered Frances to pay Northwest’s storage fees in an amount that did not exceed $1500, and finding no other error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

NFP civil opinions today (1):

Brigid Jacobs (Flannery) v. George Jacobs (NFP) - "Brigid Jacobs (Flannery) (“Wife”) appeals the trial court's order denying her petition for the modification of the dissolution decree between her and George Jacobs (“Husband”). She raises several issues, of which we find the following dispositive: whether Husband committed constructive fraud by failing to disclose that his military pension was a marital asset subject to division in the dissolution. * * *

"While Wife may have been entitled to a portion of Husband's military pension, Husband had no duty to provide legal advice to Wife on Indiana law regarding the distribution of such pensions in dissolution proceedings. Wife failed to seek legal counsel to properly advise her and cannot hold Husband responsible for her failure to do so. The trial court's decision to deny Wife's petition to modify the dissolution decree due to constructive fraud was not clearly erroneous. Affirmed."

NFP criminal opinions today (5):

Eric Hull v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Steven Matheny v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Dionne Stewart v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Courtney Simmons v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Daren Danzy v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 11, 2010 11:09 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions