STATE SENATOR JIM TOMES REFUSES TO DEBATE CANDIDATE EDIE HARDCASTLE

Multiple Dates Offered, Tomes Declines to Participate   

EVANSVILLE, Indiana – Edie Hardcastle, Democratic candidate for state senate seat District 49, revealed today that her opponent, Republican incumbent Jim Tomes, refuses to participate in a televised debate jointly hosted by the Courier & Press and by WNIN.  He has refused despite being offered three potential dates: October 22^nd, October 24^th, and November 1^st, , any of which Hardcastle has agreed to make herself available.

Hardcastle states: “The Courier & Press and WNIN have invited us both to debate the issues so the public can learn more about us and what we stand for, but Jim Tomes has refused all three opportunities.    I think Hoosiers need someone who is willing to stand up and answer questions about education, wages, and healthcare. What is he afraid of?”  A biology professor at USI, Hardcastle has dubbed her opponent “the gun guy,” because over the last eight years, he has authored legislation that has legalized switchblade knives and sawed-off shotguns, and now wants to put guns in the hands of our teachers.  

Indiana Democratic Party officials echoed Hardcastle’s dismay. John Zody, Chair of the Indiana Democratic Party, said, “This is happening all over Indiana.  Republican candidates are afraid to talk to voters about their record of trying to take away health care, voting rights, and doing nothing to make sure Hoosiers are protected equally or to address the issue of livable wages.” 

Scott Danks, Chair of the Vanderburgh County Democrats, said, “Tomes is refusing to debate because he’s afraid to defend his unpopular, radical ideas. If he’s afraid to stand up to Edie, how can we have confidence he’ll stand up to the other forty-nine State Senators on issues that are critical to his constituents?”

Hardcastle’s platform focuses on three issues: education, jobs, and energy.  She is a proponent of universal pre-K and supports fully funding public schools to improve educational outcomes and to address Indiana’s teacher shortage. She is also a strong proponent of raising the state-level minimum wage to reduce poverty and income inequality, increase economic activity, and encourage job growth. To strengthen District 49’s position as the “crossroads of America” and to attract big business to the area, Hardcastle will work to secure state funding for infrastructure repair, maintenance, and upgrades. And to create jobs, lower energy bills, and counteract pollution and climate change, she will advocate for investment in renewable energy sources.

Hardcastle  has also agreed to attend three other area candidate forums, the first hosted by Indivisible Evansville on Tuesday, September 18^th (7:00 pm at Ivy Tech Auditorium), the second by the West Side Improvement Association on Thursday, September 20^th (6:00 pm at Howell Park Shelter House), and third by the United Neighborhoods of Evansville on Thursday, September 27^th (6:00 pm at the CK Newsome Center). The candidate forums precede the upcoming general election, which will be held on Tuesday, November 6^th, 2018.

(District 49 is comprised of Posey County, five townships in Gibson County, and eight townships in Vanderburgh County.  Jim Tomes has held the District 49 seat since 2010.)

FOOTNOTE: For more information about the Edie Hardcastle, follow her on Facebook and Twitter at @Hardcastle2018, or on Instagram at @hardcastle2018.      

Dave Stafford for www.theindianalawyer.com

For the second time in less than a week, Indiana trial courts and the Department of Child Services have been chastised for denying due process in termination of parental rights cases. This time, the matter involves a DCS case manager who had a sexual relationship with a case client among a host of troubling facts.

Reversing and remanding a case to Spencer Circuit Court, the Indiana Court of Appeals on Tuesday dealt with the latest in a string of cases in which DCS acknowledged a lack of due process. The COA concluded the case was marked by “egregious behavior” of DCS employees and “unusual and alarming circumstances.”

In the case In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of C.M.S.T., T.M., & M.M. (Children) and A.S. (Mother) and R.T. (Father); et al. v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, 18A-JT-530, mother A.S. and father R.T. had their parental rights terminated. But on appeal, DCS conceded as it has in multiple recent cases that the parents’ due process rights had been violated.

DCS became involved in the instant case in March 2015, after a report that mother and father were involved in a domestic violence-related altercation and that mother used methamphetamine. Children T.M. and C.M.S.T were removed from their care, adjudicated children in need of services and placed in foster care. Mother and father were ordered to participate in services.

DCS’s “egregious behavior” began in October 2015, when former family case manager Marilyn Neal filed a false report saying that father “went to [C.M.S.T.’s] school, made a scene, and tried to take [C.M.S.T.],” according to the record. Neal was fired, another case manager briefly handled the matter, then was replaced by family case manager Megan Ginanni, who was also working with Father on a CHINS case for one of his other children.

“At some point during her time working on the case, FCM Ginanni and Father began exchanging Facebook messages, which became sexually explicit in nature. FCM Ginanni and Father also engaged in a sexual relationship. Father testified FCM Ginanni would give him advanced notice of drug screens and told him he did not need to continue engaging in certain services. Father testified FCM Ginanni told him he ‘would get reunified [with C.M.S.T.] and she would live with me and she was gonna (sic) help me get [Father’s other child] as well,’” Judge Melissa May wrote.

DCS ultimately fired Ginanni due to her inappropriate relationship. During this time, Mother had been compliant with services until she self-reported meth use in September 2016, after which her children were again removed. Mother contacted DCS in December 2016 to ask for help finding an inpatient drug treatment facility.

The record also shows the trial court denied grandparental motions to intervene seeking to have the children placed with maternal grandparents, but there is no explanation in the record why their motion was denied.  The same month as the grandparents’ motion was denied, termination of parental rights hearings began, and the court terminated mother and father’s parental rights five months later.

In June, though, facing this appeal, DCS conceded the parents’ due process rights had been violated in the termination process, but the Court of Appeals denied DCS’s motion to remand.

“We cannot agree that the egregious behavior of some of the DCS employees did not contribute to Mother’s and Father’s non-compliance with some services,” May wrote. “Father’s testimony that FCM Ginanni told him to discontinue services and seemingly accelerated the visitation and home placement schedule for C.M.S.T., while denying similar escalation of visitation to Mother is just one of many instances that lead us to believe the chaotic and unprofessional handling of this case violated Mother’s and Father’s due process rights. The State concedes this violation of due process.”

The COA appended to its decision an order of July 9 that it also appended to another termination of parental rights reversal last week. The order formally admonishes DCS “for its failure to afford litigants through this state the due process they are owed,” citing multiple cases.

“We join in those sentiments, especially considering the multiple due processes and ethical violations present in this case,” May concluded.

Dave Stafford for www.theindianalawyer.com

An Evansville-based plastic supplier’s insurer is not required to indemnify the company against a $7.2 million jury award for producing a defective product, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Monday.

The court affirmed the entry of summary judgment for Illinois National Insurance Co. in a suit filed by Berry Plastics Corp. — now known as Barry Global Inc. — stemming from a case dating back more than a decade.

Berry supplied a foil laminate product to Packgen, which manufactures specialized containers for bulk quantities of industrial chemicals, manufacturing byproducts, and other materials. Packgen worked with a customer, CRI Catalyst Co., to develop a new type of intermediate bulk container to store and ship a catalyst used in refining crude oil. The containers could be collapsed for pre-use storage, saving space and money, and CRI had interest in the containers from other companies.

By April 2008, Packgen was selling more than 1,200 containers a month to CRI and anticipated comparable future sales, when a container full of catalyst failed and other failures followed, some resulting in fires when the highly flammable catalyst was exposed to air. Packgen determined the foil laminate Berry delivered was defective, and CRI canceled all future orders.

Packgen then sued Berry in Maine, winning a federal jury trial damages verdict of $7.2 million — the full amount Packgen sought for its out-of-pocket costs and for lost future sales. Berry then demanded Illinois National indemnify it for all for the first $1 million of the damages, which was covered under a separate policy, under the Illinois National policy’s property damage clause.

Judge Richard Young in the Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, last year granted summary judgment to Illinois National, and the 7th Circuit affirmed in Berry Plastics Corporation v. Illinois National Insurance Company,17-1815.

“A jury ordered Berry to compensate the customer for the profits it could have expected to earn on future sales had the failure caused by Berry’s defective material not caused buyers to turn away from the containers,” Judge Ilana Rover wrote for the panel. “Berry contends that it has been held liable for its customer’s lost profits because of the property damage its defective component caused to the customer’s containers.

“Although we agree with Berry that some portion of the lost profits theoretically might be attributable to property damage, Berry has neither undertaken to make that showing nor demanded the opportunity to do so. For that reason, we affirm the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Illinois National.”

The 7th Circuit also rejected Berry’s bad-faith claim against Illinois National, noting that remanding for further discovery on that argument would be “a license for a pointless fishing expedition.”

Marriage Licenses Issued