Garwood v. State
| Decision Date | 11 October 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. 31S01–1710–CT–647,31S01–1710–CT–647 |
| Citation | 84 N.E.3d 624 (Mem) |
| Parties | Virginia GARWOOD and Kristen Garwood, Appellants (Plaintiffs below), v. STATE of Indiana, et al., Appellees (Defendants below). |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Attorneys for Appellants : James D. Johnson, Blair M. Gardner, Jackson Kelly PLLC, Evansville, Indiana
Attorney for Appellees : Curtis T. Hill, Jr., Attorney General of Indiana, Frances Barrow, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana
On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 31A01–1603–CT–679
Following a jury trial and the entry of judgment against one defendant, Virginia and Kristen Garwood appealed and the defendant cross-appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part. See Garwood v. State, 77 N.E.3d 204 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). The Garwoods petition to transfer.
We grant transfer for the limited purpose of vacating only that section of the Court of Appeals opinion addressing subject matter jurisdiction. We summarily affirm the remainder of the opinion. See Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A)(2). In addressing jurisdiction, the Court of Appeals opinion cites Garwood v. Indiana Department of State Revenue, 24 N.E.3d 548 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2014), but that opinion was vacated by our "Published Order" issued February 8, 2016. Due to a clerical error, our Published Order was not sent to Thomson Reuters at that time. Therefore, when the Court of Appeals issued its opinion, the Published Order was not reported in the Northeastern Reporters or on Westlaw, which has since been corrected. See Garwood v. Indiana Dep't of State Revenue, 79 N.E.3d 903 (Ind. 2016). The Published Order resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction based on the parties' representations at oral argument.
All Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Convention Headquarters Hotels, LLC v. Marion Cnty. Assessor
......(Order Dec. 3, 2019.) On June 17, 2020, Convention HQ moved for partial summary judgment on its federal and state constitutional claims. ( See Pet'r Mot. Partial Summ. J. ¶ 3.) That same day, the Assessor moved for partial summary judgment on the Indiana ... Garwood v. State , 77 N.E.3d 204, 222 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 84 N.E.3d 624 (Ind. 2017). See also Lee v. City of Chicago , ......
-
Mitchell v. Indiana Department of Correction
...... . . . Appellant Pro Se Ronald D. Mitchell Bunker Hill, Indiana. . . . Attorneys for State Appellees Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Attorney. General of Indiana Natalie F. Weiss Deputy Attorney General. Indianapolis, Indiana. . . ... unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain proscribed by the. Eighth Amendment.'" Garwood v. State, 77. N.E.3d 204, 228 (Ind.Ct.App. 2017) (quoting Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104, 97 S.Ct. 285 (1976) (quotation. and ......
-
In re Marshall, Supreme Court Case No. 71S00–1703–DI–143
...84 N.E.3d 624 (Mem)In the MATTER OF: Sven E. MARSHALL, RespondentSupreme Court Case No. 71S00–1703–DI–143Supreme Court of Indiana.FILED October 12, 2017Published Order Converting Suspension for Noncooperation with the Disciplinary Process to Indefinite Suspension Loretta H. Rush, Chief Just......
-
Green Fees: the Challenge of Pricing Externalities Under State Law
...taxes can serve a regulatory purpose. See, e.g., Garwood v. State, 77 N.E.3d 204, 225 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017), affd in part, vacated in part 84 N.E.3d 624 (Ind. 2017) ("Furthermore, the use of tax as a means to nontax ends is allowed today and is nearly as old as taxation itself. (citing Sebel......