home

Archive for March, 2005

links for 2005-03-31

Thursday, March 31st, 2005

St. Joseph County barters public record access for Realtor’s data

Thursday, March 31st, 2005

Indiana’s move to market value as the basis for property taxation has changed the county assessor’s job significantly. In the near future, property values for tax purposes will be required to keep up with trends in the local real estate market. One Indiana’s County has struck a deal in anticipation of that requirement:

The information-sharing agreement has been in the works for several weeks. In February, the commissioners approved a contract with Plexis, an Indianapolis company, to create a computer program that gives Realtors direct access to property tax files.

Those files are and have been public records available to anyone. The computer program simply makes getting access more convenient for Realtors, who will be able to get the information from their computers.

In return, the County Assessor’s office and assessors in Portage, Penn and Clay townships will get access to the Realtors’ multiple listing service records and be able to use that information to update property valuations on an annual basis.

Link.

links for 2005-03-30

Wednesday, March 30th, 2005

links for 2005-03-29

Tuesday, March 29th, 2005

Increasing accountability leads to less accountability

Tuesday, March 29th, 2005

The federal Sarbanes-Oxley Act was intended to tighten the financial reporting requirements for publicly traded companies. It was Congress’ response to the accounting scandals at WorldCom, Adelphia and Enron. But the increased reporting requirements have lead to increased costs, and as the Act increases liability of CEO’s and Boards making the disclosures, the insurance coverage for these folks has increased in costs as well.

Critics of the act note that the stricter reporting requirements fall equally on big corporations like CitiBank, as they do on your local community bank. Many “small” corporations went public to take advantage of the stock markets to raise capital, but with the increased cost associated with being a public corporation, many are second guessing this decision:

Not only are accounting and legal fees higher, so are insurance premiums. Publicly traded companies routinely buy directors and officers liability insurance to protect company leaders in case shareholders sue them over business decisions.

With the passage of Sarbanes-Oxley, the number of claims is rising, average settlement costs have doubled and increased shareholder activism makes those trends likely to continue, according to Aon Corp., an international insurance company that sells directors and officers liability coverage.

But for some companies, the next stage of compliance is the last straw.

Sarbanes-Oxley has become law in phases. Next year, publicly traded companies will have to start detailing management’s internal controls and include an auditor’s opinion on the effectiveness of those internal controls.

Randy Sizemore, Northeast Indiana Bancorp’s chief financial officer, said the parent of First Federal Savings Bank would incur “much more cost” if it tried to meet that additional reporting standard. Earning a clean bill of health from auditors’ reviews of financial statements and footnotes is already difficult enough, Sizemore said.

Link.

The bottom line for consumers in these small local banks with less than $500 million in assets is less information and less accountability.

links for 2005-03-27

Sunday, March 27th, 2005

links for 2005-03-25

Friday, March 25th, 2005

links for 2005-03-24

Thursday, March 24th, 2005

Protect marriage, and endanger who?

Thursday, March 24th, 2005

Some states, responding to the encroachment of gays and lesbians into the field of marriage, passed limited provisions, simply defining marriage as a legal relationship between 1 man and 1 woman. Others, like Ohio, and potentially, Indiana, chose much broader provisions, not only limiting who can marriage, but also preventing the state from granting the benefits of marriage to unmarried couples, supposedly to prevent the state from having to recognize marriage substitutes like civil unions.

The problem, pointed out by many critics, is that these broad provisions may take away existing protections for unmarried couples. This is a good example:

Domestic violence charges cannot be filed against unmarried people because of Ohio’s new constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, a judge ruled Wednesday.

Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Stuart Friedman changed a felony domestic violence charge against Frederick Burk to a misdemeanor assault charge.

. . . .

His public defender, David Magee, had asked the judge to throw out the charge because of the new wording in Ohio’s constitution that prohibits any state or local law that would “create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals.”

Before the amendment, courts applied the domestic violence law by defining a family as including an unmarried couple living together as would a husband and wife, the judge said. The gay marriage amendment no longer allows that.

Link.

Indiana’s proposed constitutional amendment on the subject reads as follows:

Section 38.

(a) Marriage in Indiana consists only of the union of one man and one woman.

(b) This Constitution or any other Indiana law may not be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

Link.

The trouble with this provision is that the term “legal incidents of marriage” is not defined, nor is it spelled out anywhere in state law. So would protection from domestic abuse be a legal incident of marriage, taking away protections for those living out of wedlock? Is the right of a child to support from his parent a “legal incident of marriage?” When this provision passes, I predict that we attorneys will be having fun.

Dueling murder confessions

Thursday, March 24th, 2005

Generally speaking, police investigating a crime are anxious to get a confession of some sort from a suspect before charges are brought. The defendant’s own words are the most reliable form of evidence in a criminal case.

But in this case, the police are suffering from too much of a good thing. A man is found dead in Sullivan, Indiana. An investigation is launched, but police had not considered the case as a possible murder. Then one man summons the police and confesses to beating the dead man to death. Then the man’s father goes to police and confesses to forcing him to take a drug overdose at gunpoint.

Maybe the father is just trying to protect the son, or the other way around. The problem? The dean man did not suffer from either blunt force trauma nor were there any drugs found in his system. 2 confessions, both bogus, the police are in for a tough one.

Government empire building

Wednesday, March 23rd, 2005

When confronted with a problem, government solutions tend toward increasing the size and complexity of the government. So generally, when something is not working, the solution is to basically increase the size of the solution.

Some may disagree, but I think this is a prime example:

Advocates called on the state and the public to increase efforts to prevent child abuse and neglect following the unrelated deaths in recent days of three children whose families had prior contact with child welfare authorities.

“There are 92 counties, and there are probably 90 different ways of doing things, and we intend to make that more uniform and consistent,” said James W. Payne, director of the Department of Child Services.

Payne said one call center staffed by specially trained operators could help provide consistency in the way child protection workers respond to reports of abuse and neglect.

Link.

So instead of local official dealing with a local problem, we will have the ever efficient state government initiating (and presumably overseeing) the process, dictating the actions to be taken by those local officials. I agree that there are 92 different approaches to dealing with reports of child neglect and abuse under the current system, and that a report of child neglect in Marion county will be met with a very different reaction than in Union counties. But, those reactions, in my experience, are generally consistent with the expectations of the local citizens and with the budgets of local governments.

I doubt that having all local agencies comply with the standards and procedures set out by Judge Payne will solve the problem of children slipping through the safety net and getting harmed, but I have no doubt that the added complexity and centralized control will add costs and headaches to an already overburdened system.

links for 2005-03-23

Wednesday, March 23rd, 2005

You will pay for that

Wednesday, March 23rd, 2005

When parents remain married, they can choose whether and to what extent they will contribute towards their children’s college expenses, without the involvement of the state. However, if the child was born out of wedlock, or the parents divorce before the child is emancipated, in many situations, a parent can be forced to contribute.

Actually, the states are all over the map on this issue. In Indiana, such a parent can be ordered to pay a share of college expenses. Generally speaking, 21 states will impose responsibility for college expenses, while 29 state will not. (Source: NCSL). However, the specific provision vary widely from state to state and are not subject to easy summary (some states have absolute cut off ages, like 21 or 23, others like Indiana permit expenses for college to continue, even after the child reached the age where regular child support is terminated).

Indiana’s statute on the issue (IC 31-16-6-2) is frustratingly vauge, leaving the appeals courts to rule that the determination is left largely to the discretion of the trial courts. Trial courts are all over the map in Indiana on this issue: Some courts limit costs to what an in-state university would charge, while others will impose orders beyond this. Some courts will include expense items like clothing, car insurance, and even pizza money.

In Indiana, regular child support terminates at age 21, regardless, but coverage for college expenses can continue beyond this. As a child may be in college until age 22 or even 23, what “educational” expenses are included after age 21? Room and board? Transportation? Medical insurance and expenses? Again, the Indiana provision is surprisingly unhelpful. In most cases I encounter, the parents work together to come up with an agreement to resolve parental responsibility for these costs, but in some, particularly where the relationship between a parent and the child has become attenuated, litigation is required.

Many parents under a college expense order, are frustrated by the lack of control: The child is making choices in their lives that the parent does not agree with, and the parent is deprived of the standard parental response: threaten to close the wallet.

A recent case from the Indiana Court of Appeals:

Snow next contends that the trial court erred in not defining the terms “school expenses” and “college expenses” in its order. Specifically, he argues that his obligation should not be calculated to include certain expenses, such as car payments, parking, car insurance, gasoline, license plates, utilities, clothing, and a cell phone.

We note that the trial court has discretion to determine what is included in educational expenses

What to take from this? If you want to maintain control over this issue, you might want to consider moving to Kentucky, Ohio or Michigan before you get divorced. . . .

1 Courtroom, 2 prosecutors

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2005

Often, those of us in the criminal defense bar feel that we are really on our own: the police, prosecutors, “victims” and public are all working against us, and stories like these don’t help abate the feeling of isolation:

A former California prosecutor testified Tuesday that he colluded with a judge to exclude Jews from the jury in a capital case that ultimately sent the defendant to death row.

John “Jack” Quatman said he and the late Alameda County Superior Court Judge Stanley Golde, at the judge’s urging, conspired to shape the jury so it would likely send the killer to San Quentin State Prison.

Some of the most damaging evidence presented Tuesday was Quatman’s recollection of a lecture he said the judge gave him privately in chambers on April 28, 1987, while they were picking a jury in the capital case of Fred Freeman, a white man later sentenced to death for killing a bar patron during a robbery in Berkeley.

“What are you doing?” Quatman recalled Golde asking him.

“I said, ‘What do you mean?’”

“You didn’t challenge the Jew,” Golde said.

“I said, ‘What?’”

“No Jewish person can sit on a death penalty jury and vote for death,” the judge said, according to Quatman.

Link.

links for 2005-03-22

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2005

Sauce for the goose

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2005

In the Indiana Pacer brawl case, I noted before that the attorney representing the alleged chair thrower was being forced to testify against his client because he identified his own client when police showed him a video of the incident.

Now, the defense is trying to turn the tables on the prosecutor:

Attorney Shawn Smith said he wants Gorcyca to testify about the alleged bad blood between his client, John Green, and the prosecutor when they were neighbors in Royal Oak more than a decade ago.

Smith wrote Gorcyca’s office Monday, saying he is using the same logic that prosecutors used when they sought the testimony of a lawyer for a man accused of throwing a chair during the brawl between Indiana players and Detroit Pistons fans.

Link.

links for 2005-03-19

Saturday, March 19th, 2005

links for 2005-03-18

Friday, March 18th, 2005

Nice save judge

Friday, March 18th, 2005

Sometimes, criminal litigation is extremely complex, especially federal litigation, as anyone who has watched or participated in a federal white collar case that can go on for weeks can attest to. But sometimes, all that complexity can mask some common sense facts. Good thing David Hamilton is on the job:

U.S. District Court Judge David F. Hamilton dismissed charges against former Bath State Bank loan officer Blaine Bourne and Phillip P. Lucas, who was a bank customer.

Charges filed against Bourne and Lucas in January 2004 accused the men of improperly obtaining loans from the Bath State Bank in Bath, Ind.

The U.S. attorney accused Lucas with paying and Bourne with accepting a bribe to obtain loans from the Franklin County bank for Lucas’ benefit. The charges came from an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Bourne and Lucas were before the court last summer to accept plea agreements when Hamilton questioned whether their actions were, in fact, criminal, according to court documents.

Hamilton asked defense attorneys and the U.S. attorney to agree on the facts of the case and present them to the court for review.

After the facts were presented, the court found that a reasonable jury could not find beyond a reasonable doubt that either defendant acted “corruptly,” a necessary element of the law under which they were charged.

Link.

Read that again, the FBI thought the case was worth investigating, the US Attorney thought the case merited prosecution, and the defense attorneys decided it was best to accept a guilty plea. What were the facts behind this 4 year criminal investigation that led all the confusion?

In 2000, Bourne obtained two loans from the bank in his name totaling $65,000. He then transferred the funds to Lucas, a business acquaintance and sometimes business partner.

Lucas didn’t qualify for a loan on his own. The loans were repaid to the bank on time and Lucas paid Bourne an additional $8,000 for loaning him the money, according to court documents.

Hamilton termed what Bourne did as “good old-fashioned capitalism.”

“Looking at the loan transactions, there is nothing unlawful about the end or result here, nor is there anything unlawful in the transactions. Bourne borrowed money from the bank and re-loaned it to Lucas at a profit. Bourne was fully liable on both loans from the Bath State Bank. Neither he nor Lucas gave the bank false information about the purposes or uses of the loans and no bank officer’s judgment or loyalty was tainted,” Hamilton wrote.

links for 2005-03-17

Thursday, March 17th, 2005
  • Photos

    Spring has sprung at home (iPhoneSlide)

    Last meal on the trip (iPhoneSlide)

    Bathroom break #1 (iPhoneSlide)

    More Photos
  • Loading...
  • New Links of Interest