Case law

Lannan v. State

600 N.E.2d 1334 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1992

That is, the State may prove identity by showing that the similarities between the prior offense and the crime charged are so strong and the method so clearly unique that it is highly probable that the perpetrator of both … "However, the repeated commission of similar crimes is not enough to qualify for the exception to the general rule.

Walker v. State

668 N.E.2d 243 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1996

We have encountered this question in a variety of settings, including statutes we concluded were meant to establish strict liability for so-called "white collar" crimes. Enservco, Inc. v. … Code, proof of dealing cocaine "within 1000 feet of a school" changes what would be a Class B felony with a minimum sentence of six years to a Class A felony with a minimum sentence of 20 years. [4] *246 This fact surely qualifies

Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Heck

151 Ind. 292 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1898

On the contrary, it clearly appears that both of these regulations were violated in sending out the extra freight. … The contrary is held to be the law in Mississippi and in Maryland in a qualified form.

Kealing v. Vansickle

74 Ind. 529 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 15, 1881

And this liability is clearly shown by the ¡special finding here.” … A regular “indorsement, when made for an adequate consideratioh, passes the interest of the indorser, and amounts to axx undertaking, unless qualified in express tenxis, that if the bill or xxote is not paid at maturity,

Sievers v. Peters Box & Lumber Co.

151 Ind. 642 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1898

Appellant objected to the question which elicited the evidence, on the grounds “that the witness has not shown himself qualified to speak, also that it does not appear that the witness has sufficient knowledge and information … But there is no presumption that any party to a cause has given any evidence to establish his adversary’s case or defense.

Cox v. Louisville, New Albany, & Chicago Railroad

48 Ind. 178 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1874

universal acceptation of the word street thus used, as being synonymous with a highway, or common thoroughfare, will govern this grant, and fix the purpose for which it was intended.’ ’ This case has never been doubted, qualified … Without citing or examining other authorities, we think it may be laid down that the established inference of law is, that a conveyance of land bounded on a highway carries with it the fee to the center of the road, as part

Christopher Tiplick v. State of Indiana

43 N.E.3d 1259 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 7, 2015

Standard of Review “It is well established that a trial court’s denial of a motion to dismiss is reviewed only for an abuse of discretion.” Study v. State, 24 N.E.3d 947, 950 (Ind. 2015). … “Due process principles advise that a penal statute is void for vagueness if it does not clearly define its prohibitions.” Brown v. State, 868 N.E.2d 464, 467 (Ind. 2007).

NIPSCO Industrial Group v. Northern Indiana Public Service Company

Indiana Supreme Court · Sep 25, 2018

Designated vs. described The parties dispute what qualifies as an eligible project under Section 2, which requires both designation and approval of the project in a seven- year plan the Commission approves under Section … And it generally endorsed NIPSCO’s proposal to establish objective ascertainable criteria for selecting specific projects within “project group” categories.

In Re Hailey

792 N.E.2d 851 · Indiana Supreme Court · Aug 8, 2003

The application of this statutory obligation is not complex and there is no evidence in the record establishing any resistance by the subro-gated insurers to do so upon being informed of the requirements of the statute. … A qualified structured settlement, like the one in this case, may result in all future payments from the annuity being treated as non-taxable income.

Hebel v. Conrail, Inc.

475 N.E.2d 652 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1985

The lamp was approximately three feet above the water's surface rather than at the height established by the Coast Guard Regulation. … The trial court did err if it admitted the entire exhibit upon the premise that its entire contents qualified under the exception.

Orbison v. WELSH, GOVERNOR

242 Ind. 385 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1962

The source of the appropriation here is clearly indicated by §12 of the Indiana Port Commission Act to be the unexpended funds appropriated by the 1957 Act (ch. 286, §6) which are thereby transferred to the Indiana Port Fund … of the powers conferred by this act in the construction, operation and maintenance of a port project shall be deemed and held to be essential governmental functions of the state, but the commission shall not however be immune

Pate v. Bushong

63 L.R.A. 593 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1903

Bushong (appellee) was appointed and qualified as executor of said will, and paid over to appellants, Cora C. Warrington and Phoebe T. … Thus, if a testator devise his black horse, having only a white one, or devise his freehold houses, having only leasehold houses, the white horse in the one case, and the leasehold houses in the other, would clearly pass.

Baldwin v. Reagan

715 N.E.2d 332 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jul 6, 1999

For this reason, every statute stands before us clothed with the presumption of constitutionality unless clearly overcome by a contrary showing. Boehm v. Town of St. John, 675 N.E.2d 318, 321 (Ind.1996) (construing art. … Article I, § 23, provides: "The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.”

Worman Enterprises, Inc. v. The Boone County Solid Waste Management District

805 N.E.2d 369 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 9, 2004

The Boone County Solid Waste Management District was established for Boone County either by designation or by default. … Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution imposes two requirements upon statutes that grant unequal privileges or immunities to differing classes of persons.

Matter of Strutz

652 N.E.2d 41 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1995

Respondent served as the refinery's attorney in this process and directed the establishment of the trusts by outside counsel. … Each of the three companies was clearly Respondent's client. We also conclude that the derivative action individual plaintiff, Mr.

NIPSCO Industrial Group v. Northern Public Service Company

Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 20, 2018

Designated vs. described The parties dispute what qualifies as an eligible project under Section 2, which requires both designation and approval of the project in a seven- year plan the Commission approves under Section … And it generally endorsed NIPSCO’s proposal to establish objective ascertainable criteria for selecting specific projects within “project group” categories.

State v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

224 Ind. 17 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1945

It seems to us that the phi *34 losophy which qualifies the burden permitted would also qualify the discrimination forbidden and apply the prohibitions only to such discrimination as would prejudice or harm the’ interstate … Wood Preserving Corp., supra, originated in Indiana and clearly points the answer in the case before us.

James v. State

613 N.E.2d 15 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 13, 1993

Clearly, jurors have the right to adequately view evidence presented to them. … Clearly the State must introduce evidence during the habitual proceeding to prove the two priors.

Moran v. State

644 N.E.2d 536 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1994

Clearly, it afforded no protection against the acts of these police in taking and inspecting the trash set out by appellants at the curb for pickup. California v. … Facts supported by reliable hearsay qualify. The search warrant was issued on April 20, 1992 and executed on April 22.

Buchanan v. Berkshire Life Insurance

96 Ind. 510 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 7, 1883

Although the ques *518 tion, in the manner here presented, has not been before this court until now, the cases above cited, we think, clearly establish the rule to be, that before a party is entitled to a judgment for want … We are of the opinion that the facts stated in the petition were clearly sufficient to authorize the appointment of the receiver.