Patrick D. Sullivan

In Gunn v. State, Ken Gunn was charged with Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license after a traffic stop led to discovery of his expired permit. The trial court denied his motion to suppress evidence from the stop, which an officer had initiated after observing Gunn make a left turn into the outer lane of a four-lane road rather than the inner lane closest to the center line. On interlocutory appeal, the court reversed, concluding that the stop violated the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution because Gunn's turn complied with the statute and an officer's mistaken belief about the law does not supply reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop.

gunscriminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

The case of Lynn v. Greer was an appeal before the Court of Appeals of Indiana. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the disposition of the lower court. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the decision, with Judges Najam and Riley concurring.

procedure

The case Clover v. State was a criminal appeal before the Indiana Court of Appeals. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the lower court's ruling. All three judges on the panel concurred in the result, though the excerpt provides no further facts or analysis regarding the underlying charges or issues presented on appeal.

criminal law

The case involved George Finney, a teacher at Westville Correctional Facility, whose employment was terminated after he attempted to bring a cell phone into the facility on two occasions and became belligerent during the resulting investigation. An administrative law judge and the full Indiana State Employees’ Appeals Commission upheld the termination, but Finney sought judicial review. The trial court granted review and remanded, finding the administrative record so deficient—due to inaudible or blank recordings of most witness testimony—that it lacked substantial evidence to support the agency’s decision. On appeal, the court affirmed, holding that the agency failed to preserve an adequate record as required by statute and that Westville could not seek a new hearing after agreeing to proceed on the existing transcript.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case King v. State was an appeal to the Indiana Court of Appeals from a criminal proceeding designated as No. 71A05-1007-CR-560. The court disposed of the matter through an unpublished memorandum decision that affirmed the lower court's ruling. Senior Judge Sullivan issued the decision, with Judges Barnes and Bradford concurring in the result.

criminal law

Jackson v. State was a criminal appeal before the Indiana Court of Appeals. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the disposition of the case below. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the decision, in which Judges Bailey and Vaidik concurred, without elaboration on the specific issues or reasoning in the excerpt provided.

criminal law

The case Watson v. State was a criminal appeal heard by the Indiana Court of Appeals. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the trial court's ruling. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the opinion, with Judges May and Bailey concurring in the result.

criminal law

The case Clayton v. State was a criminal appeal before the Indiana Court of Appeals. The appellant sought review of a trial court decision, but the appeals court issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the lower court's ruling. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the disposition, with Judges Baker and Crone concurring in the result.

criminal law

The case Floyd v. State was a criminal appeal before the Indiana Court of Appeals. The appellant challenged a trial court ruling in a criminal matter designated under cause number 49A02-1005-CR-550. The Court of Appeals issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the lower court's disposition. The panel, consisting of Senior Judge Sullivan with Judges Najam and Vaidik concurring, provided no further published analysis or reasoning for the affirmance.

criminal law

In this medical malpractice case, the estate of an 89-year-old patient who died after receiving the wrong medication (Retavase instead of ReoPro) in the emergency room sued the hospital and treating physicians for negligence. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants after excluding an expert cardiologist's opinion on causation as unreliable under Indiana Evidence Rule 702 and finding no genuine issue of material fact. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the expert's opinion was admissible because it was based on reliable scientific principles and that the facts, including the administration of twice the prescribed dose of a thrombolytic drug, created a triable issue on whether the hospital's error proximately caused the patient's hemorrhage and death. The court also noted that the medical review panel's opinions did not conclusively negate causation. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

healthcareproceduretorts & liability

The case involved G.M.'s appeal of an involuntary commitment order to Logansport State Hospital based on a finding that he was gravely disabled due to schizophrenia and addiction issues. The trial court concluded that G.M. could not provide for his essential needs, but the appellate court determined the evidence did not support that specific basis. Instead, the court affirmed the commitment because Dr. Thompson's testimony provided clear and convincing evidence that G.M. would likely discontinue medication if released, leading to relapse into substance abuse and inability to function independently, satisfying the statutory alternative definition of grave disability. The decision relied on precedent allowing affirmance of commitments where evidence supports the outcome even if the lower court's stated reasoning differed.

criminal lawhealthcare

This case involved a challenge by Wyatt to Ellspermann's declaration of candidacy for the Indiana House of Representatives in the 2010 Republican primary, arguing that her party affiliation statement was invalid because she had voted as a Democrat in the prior primary. The Indiana Elections Commission deadlocked on the challenge, leaving Ellspermann on the ballot, and the trial court denied Wyatt's petition for review and injunctive relief. The appellate court affirmed, finding no error in the denial after addressing procedural issues like laches and mootness. The court also upheld the denial of attorney's fees to both parties.

elections

In Pruitt v. State, the defendant was charged with a Class C felony for operating a motor vehicle after his driving privileges had been forfeited for life, following a traffic stop by an officer who observed him driving without headlights in a private business parking lot after midnight. Pruitt moved to suppress the resulting evidence, arguing that the stop was invalid because it occurred on private property without a contractual agreement for traffic enforcement under Indiana Code sections 9-21-18-1 to 9-21-18-15, and that the relevant statutes did not apply to private lots. The trial court denied the motion, and on interlocutory appeal the court affirmed, holding that the habitual offender statute (Indiana Code section 9-30-10-17) and related traffic laws are not limited to public highways and apply to private parking lots used by the public to protect safety, that no contract is required for officers to investigate violations there, and that the officer had reasonable suspicion based on the lack of headlights even if the precise violation statute referenced highways. The court relied on precedents like Guidry v. State and Datzek v. State to support that the legislature intended broad application without limiting language.

criminal lawprocedure

The case Watts v. State was a criminal appeal filed in the Indiana Court of Appeals under docket number 79A02-1002-CR-167. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the lower court's ruling. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the decision, with Judges Bailey and Brown concurring. No further details on the underlying facts or legal issues were provided in the excerpt.

criminal law

The case involved a claim by the estate of James Everhart against Indiana's Patient's Compensation Fund for excess damages after settlements in a wrongful death action stemming from alleged medical malpractice. Everhart was injured in a motorcycle-truck accident and died in the emergency room; evidence showed that proper care by Dr. Clarke would have given him over an 80% chance of survival. The trial court awarded the estate $1 million in full damages under the loss of chance doctrine. On appeal, the court reversed, holding that damages must instead be calculated proportionally to the increased risk of harm caused by the malpractice rather than awarding full wrongful death damages. The case was remanded for recalculation of damages, with the trial court also directed to address set-off issues from prior settlements.

healthcaretorts & liability

The case Lacy v. State was a criminal appeal before the Indiana Court of Appeals. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision that affirmed the trial court's ruling in part and remanded the matter for additional action. All three judges on the panel concurred in the disposition.

criminal lawprocedure

The case R.J.K. v. State was an appeal to the Indiana Court of Appeals from a lower court ruling in a juvenile matter against the state. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision that affirmed the disposition below. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the decision, with Judges Riley and Mathias concurring in the result. The affirmation disposed of the appeal without additional published analysis or elaboration on the underlying facts or legal issues.

criminal lawfamily law

In Brogan v. State, the defendant, who pleaded guilty in 1994 to child molesting offenses committed before Indiana's 1994 Sex Offender Registration Law, appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to be removed from the sex offender registry, claiming the registration requirement violated the ex post facto clause of the Indiana Constitution under the principle from Wallace v. State. The trial court had ruled it lacked jurisdiction because Brogan had fully served his sentence and was never ordered to register. The Court of Appeals reviewed the evolution of the registration statutes from 1994 onward, noting that the duty to register was initially tied to probation or parole but later expanded, and held that such claims must proceed via petition under the specific procedures of Indiana Code § 11-8-8-22 to allow full consideration of the offender's history and circumstances.

criminal lawprocedure

The case Gavin v. State was a criminal appeal heard by the Indiana Court of Appeals. The defendant sought review of a trial court ruling in a criminal matter. In an unpublished memorandum decision, the court affirmed the disposition below. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the decision, with Judges Mathias and Crone concurring.

criminal law

This case was an appeal filed by McDillon against Northern Indiana Public Service Co. in the Indiana Court of Appeals. The court issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the disposition of the lower court. Senior Judge Sullivan authored the decision, with Judges Friedlander and Vaidik concurring.

business & regulatory