Main Menu
Posts from November 2009.
Posted in Litigation

In Garcia v. State, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed Garcia’s conviction of an enhanced sentence and habitual substance offender determination because the trial court did not obtain from Garcia a personal waiver of his right to have a jury make these determinations.  In particular the Court of Appeals found that “it is apparent that Garcia did not acquiesce in his attorney’s ...

Posted in Litigation

In Donovan v. Grand Victoria Casino & Resort, L.P., the Indiana Court of Appeals held that a card counter was “entitled to summary judgment on his request for a declaratory judgment to the effect that Grand Victoria may not exclude him from blackjack because he counts cards.”  The Court observed that the Gaming Commission “did not enact a prohibition against card counting and Grand ...

Posted in Litigation

In Miller v. State, the Indiana Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 opinion, reversed Miller’s conviction for armed robbery, finding that the trial court erred when it allowed the State to us as a demonstrative aid in closing argument a YouTube video that had been “created for school administrators to see ‘how easy it was to conceal a weapon inside clothing.’”  The video was not admitted ...

Posted in Litigation

In Kohlmeyer v. Second Injury Fund, the Indiana Supreme Court found that a worker cannot include in his or her calculation for eligibility for additional compensation from the Second Injury Fund benefits from other sources.  Specifically Social Security Act benefits could not be included in determining the worker’s eligibility for Second Injury Fund compensation under the ...

Posted in Litigation

In Gunashekar v. Grose, the Indiana Supreme Court analyzed whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying the Gunashekars’ motion for a continuance of a half day bench trial after the trial court granted their attorney’s motion to withdraw six weeks before the scheduled trial.  The Court observed that the Gunashekars “said nothing to the trial judge to indicate whether ...

There are many advantages and protections available when you register your business as a corporation, LLC or other entity. However, if your business does not follow the required “corporate formalities,” a court may decide to “pierce the corporate veil” in order to make your own personal assets available for injured parties.

There are several types of business entities to ...

Posted in General

On October 30, 2008, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the Final 2009 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) and expanded the applicability of the Anti-Markup Rule due to CMS’ concern over certain arrangements that may technically meet the Stark Law in-office ancillary services exception, but are not within what CMS views as the exception’s intended purpose. At the same time, CMS has provided billing physicians with greater flexibility in structuring in-office diagnostic testing to avoid the application of the Anti-Markup Rule.

The breakup of a business partnership is often traumatic. The breakup of a marriage can be much worse. Understanding how Indiana’s divorce law applies to the division of a horse breeding or training business, or any other horse-related enterprise can help reduce the anxiety one may experience in the marital breakup.

Generally, Indiana follows the “equitable distribution” ...

I’ve heard the saying that a release "isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on" more than I care to think about. The general perception is that a release will not be enforced in a court of law and will not protect an equine professional from incurring potentially large monetary liability. However, when written correctly, releases can protect and serve as a defense against a potential ...

RSS RSS Feed

Subscribe

Recent Posts

Categories

Contributors

Archives

Back to Page