Failure of Child Services to provide father with notice of hearings and copies of all orders in the CHINS phase of proceedings, when Child Services knew father’s name and whereabouts, violated Due Process and required reversal of termination of father’s parental rights.
J. Kirsch
Lacy-McKinney v. Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp., No. 71A03-0912-CV-587, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 19, 2010)
“HUD [mortgage] servicing responsibilities . . . are binding conditions precedent that must be complied with before a mortgagee has the right to foreclose on a HUD property.”
Bunch v. State, No. 49A04-1002-CR-120, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 17, 2010)
Successive confinement of the victim in different places in her home during a burglary/robbery was a single episode of confinement, so that Indiana Double Jeopardy prohibited separate confinement convictions for the confinements in different rooms.
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Clancy, No. 45A03-0910-CV-498, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 26, 2010)
Insurance company’s affirmative defense that coverage for husband’s emotional distress claim was “fairly debatable” was not an advice of counsel defense and hence did not waive attorney-client privilege for communications with Allstate’s counsel.
Long v. State, No. 41A04-0912-CR-743, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2010)
Evidence raised sufficient inference that purchaser under lease-to-purchase contract never intended to pay, so that proof purchaser took furnishings when he moved out sufficed, with intent inference, to prove crime of theft.