.jpg)
Significant Cases
In re Guardianship of E.N., 88A01-0508-CV-338 and 88S01-0703-CV-121
I was appointed to represent two brothers on appeal in In re Guardianship of E.N., 88A01-0508-CV-338 and 88S01-0703-CV-121, who objected to the trial court’s adoption of an estate plan for their incapacitated elderly brother, E.N. In the estate plan, the guardians essentially rewrote E.N.’s wills in such a way that disinherited the brothers and bequeathed E.N.’s estate to themselves. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Our Supreme Court reversed, finding that the trial court had no statutory authority under the guardianship statutory scheme to dispose of E.N.’s estate in this manner.
Bowlds v. State, 27A02-0408-PC-696
I was hired as private counsel by the Defendant to prosecute his appeal in Bowlds v. State, 27A02-0408-PC-696. I consolidated this post-conviction appeal with the Defendant’s direct appeal. Throughout the proceedings, the Defendant insisted on his innocence and claimed that he did not receive a fair trial. We were successful on appeal. The Court of Appeals reversed the Defendant’s conviction based upon the State’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence that a third person may have committed the crime. The Court also condemned the State’s suggestive pretrial lineup and noted that a prosecutor’s conduct during trial was likely misconduct. My client's convictions were reversed, and he was released from incarceration.
Allen v. Allen, 13S01-1601-DR-00053
I was hired by the former wife in a dissolution action in Allen v. Allen, 13S01-1601-DR-00053, wherein the former husband sought to compel my client to pay for the daughter’s graduate school tuition. The trial court refused the former husband’s request, and I defended the appeal. The Court of Appeals reversed our win, so I brought a cross-appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court, arguing, for the first time, that trial courts do not have the statutory authority to compel parents to pay for their children’s graduate school expenses. In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court agreed with our argument and ordered that trial courts may no longer force parents to pay for a child’s graduate school in a divorce proceeding, changing family law throughout Indiana.
Taylor v. State, 82S00-1610-LW-00576
I was appointed to represent the Defendant on appeal in Taylor v. State, 82S00-1610-LW-00576. My client was only the fifth juvenile in Indiana’s history to be sentenced to life without parole, and he was only the second juvenile to bring a challenge to the appropriateness and constitutionality of such a sentence. I believed at the time and I believe now that life without parole sentences for juveniles should be limited to the most extreme cases. In the end, we were successful, and our Supreme Court vacated my client's LWOP sentence.
In re the Adoption of K.A.W., 31A01-1712-AD-02797
I was hired by a couple who had raised their grandniece since birth. They petitioned to adopt the child against the wishes of the child’s father. The trial court involuntarily terminated the father’s parental rights and granted the couple’s petition. In the father’s appeal in In re the Adoption of K.A.W., 31A01-1712-AD-02797, I successfully defended the trial court’s judgment as counsel for the adoptive parents. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment, finalizing the adoption. This case was a significant win because my clients were relatives of the mother and had been the only caretakers the child had ever known.
In the Matter of F.S., 13A01-1505-JM-00363
In In the Matter of F.S., 13A01-1505-JM-00363, the trial court issued an order compelling a mother to produce her children for interviews with the Department of Child Services. I was appointed to represent the mother on appeal. I challenged the authority of DCS and the trial court to compel the mother to present her children to DCS because DCS did not present any evidence of good cause to demand interviews of the children. The Court of Appeals reversed, blocking DCS from interviewing the children.
Estate of Ward v. Estate of Ward, 23A-EU-1623
In Estate of Ward v. Estate of Ward, 23A-EU-1623, I defended the estate of a deceased husband on appeal against a claim by the estate of the deceased wife. We were successful on appeal. The Court of Appeals held that the husband's estate was entitled to 100% of a corporation operated by the husband during life and that the collection of certain memorabilia was not the property of the corporation and so was owned fully by the husband at the time of his death.