Case law

Sherlock v. Bainbridge

41 Ind. 35 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1872

Where a stream, which is clearly not navigable, forms the boundaries of proprietors on each side of it, under the common law, each may claim to the middle of the stream. … The appellee’s wharf or wharf-boat is clearly entitled to no greater immunity, as against a person navigating the river, than if it had been a floating craft navigating the river, in which event, in case of collision, wilfulness

Department of Insurance v. Marion Superior Court

236 Ind. 1 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1956

A number of such applicants had taken and passed the written examination prescribed by law and had been notified by the proper authorities that they had successful^ qualified for licenses to write automobile insurance. … The rights which the Company is here endeavoring to protect are, under the circumstances in this case, clearly the basis for equitable relief and the Marion Circuit Court had jurisdiction of this particular case, and it did

Ashabraner v. Bowers

753 N.E.2d 662 · Indiana Supreme Court · Aug 30, 2001

Ashabraner appealed, claiming that Bowers used a racially-based peremptory challenge, an expert witness was not qualified, and the trial court erred in regard to two instructions. … Because Batson applies to civil cases, the trial court was clearly wrong to conclude that "peremptory challenges can be utilized for any reason." (R. at 182.)

Department of Financial Institutions v. Union Bank & Trust Co.

212 Ind. 97 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 17, 1937

It appears from the record and briefs in this action that on or about the 8th day of March, 1929, Citizens State Bank of Huntington was appointed and qualified in the Circuit Court of Howard County, Indiana, in Probate Cause … There *110 after Powell brought a suit in the state court against the trustee to establish the validity of the mortgage.

Jervis v. State

679 N.E.2d 875 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 12, 1997

Floyd’s statements to Molinet were clearly hearsay and therefore inadmissible unless within an exception to the hearsay rule. … Indeed, alternate jurors are presumed to be fair and equally qualified to the task. French v. State, 521 N.E.2d 346, 349 (Ind.1988).

Michigan Southern & Northern Indiana Railroad v. Heaton

37 Ind. 448 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1871

S. 344, is relied upon by the appellant as establishing that under such contract the .appellant would only be liable for gross neglect, or want of ordinary care. … This is clearly shown by what is said, on page 385, on the subject.

Johnson v. Wysocki

990 N.E.2d 456 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 25, 2013

In 1996, the Johnsons established the Barbara A. Johnson Living Trust and deeded the property to the Trust. They lived in the home continually, with William Johnson doing most renovation work that arose. … Tharp, 914 N.E.2d 756, 766 (Ind.2009) (actual knowledge of falsity vitiates qualified privilege for communicating with law enforcement in defamation action); Delta Tau Delta, Beta Alpha Chapter v.

Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Wills

717 N.E.2d 151 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1999

A corporation may not employ qualified practitioners to carry on the business of practicing for it. … The North Carolina statute simply memorialized a doctrine that was already well-established under the law.

State v. Cummins

171 Ind. 112 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1908

Wherefore relator prayed the issuance of an alternative writ of mandamus, commanding appellees to appoint two qualified members of said denomination to serve as such arbiters. … The law knows no heresy, and is committed to the support of no dogma, the establishment of no sect.

State Ex Rel. Clemens v. Kern

215 Ind. 515 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1939

the appellant suggests that: (a) pension laws are to be liberally construed to effect their purpose; (b) that a statute ordinarily acts prospectively and not retrospectively; (c) that while a proviso in a statute usually qualifies … appellees advance the following propositions-: (a) that the grammatical construction of the clause, “those who have resigned, been removed or suspended, and have been reinstated by the board,” appearing in the third proviso, clearly

Clinic for Women, Inc. v. Brizzi

837 N.E.2d 973 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 23, 2005

Regardless of one's personal opinion on these issues, the proper resolution of this case is properly grounded on well-established principles of Indiana law. … For example, drivers are required to wear seat belts, Ind.Code § 9-19-10-2 to -2.5; school children must receive immunizations before attending public school, 410 Ind.

Lott v. State

690 N.E.2d 204 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1997

Recantation by Harris Lott claims that Harris’s recantation of her trial testimony qualifies as newly discovered evidence requiring a new trial. … Mark Lott has not established abuse of discretion. Conclusion We affirm the judgement of the trial court. DICKSON, SULLIVAN and BOEHM, JJ., concur. SELBY, J., concurs in result: 1 .

State ex rel. Burroughs v. Webster

41 L.R.A. 212 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1898

These are, however, questions for the legislature; and, so long as the act is not clearly in violation of any provision of the constitution, it cannot be held invalid. … Due consideration, therefore, for the protection of society .may well induce the state to exclude from practice those who have not such a license, or who are found upon examination not to be fully qualified.

Miami Coal Co. v. Fox, Treas.

203 Ind. 99 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1931

We deduce from the record that the word “receivable” does not qualify the property named “bills.” Open accounts or unliquidated accounts are choses in action. Sere v. Pitot (1810), 6 Cranch (U. S.) 333, 3 L. … Tangible personal property which has acquired such a situs is immune from taxation, when considered as a form of riches upon which to base a tax in personam upon its owner.

Kathryne Tillett v. State of Indiana

Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 24, 2026

The allegations originated with E.W., who was interviewed first by a qualified forensic interviewer with no prior knowledge of the allegations of abuse at issue. … Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Tillett’s mental health was clearly an issue from the outset of her prosecution.

In re: Indiana State Fair Litigation, Mid-America Sound Corporation v. Indiana State Fair Commission, Jill Polet

Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 28, 2016

Though none of the indemnity language in this invoice expressly extends to losses prior to the invoice date, Mid-America argues that its course of dealing with the Commission established such an agreement—or at least raises … In view of that conclusion, we express no opinion on whether the Commission is a govern- mental entity with immunity under the Indiana Tort Claims Act (ITCA), Ind.

Perigo v. State

541 N.E.2d 936 · Indiana Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1989

The Grigsby opinion held that the defendant was entitled to a hearing on whether a death-qualified jury was more likely to convict than a jury selected without regard for juror views on the death penalty, to establish whether … Clearly, one manner in which a person could discover such infidelity is by verbal communication.

Hicks v. State

213 Ind. 277 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1937

He qualified as an expert to testify as to the effect of 20. injuries sustained by Miller and the jury had the right to decide whether the evidence tended to prove the facts contained in the question. … And instruction No. 40 clearly shows to our mind that our interpretation of instruction No. 39 is correct.

Dorsey v. State

490 N.E.2d 260 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 11, 1986

However, neither characteristic of appellant's detention qualifies him as an intended beneficiary of the Interstate Detainer Agreement. … However, this status also does not bring him within the coverage of qualified persons entitled to the benefits of this act.

Walker v. Hill

111 Ind. 223 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 14, 1887

It is true, perhaps, that the adjudication did not establish Rowley’s title; but it did establish conclusively that John Walker and the appellants, in so far as they claimed under John, had no such title to the real estate … Torbit was appointed and qualified as guardian of John and Thomas T. Walker, and, on the same day, Edward M. Sharp was appointed and qualified as guardian of Eleanor Baxter, then Walker.