Case law

Hill v. Ward

45 Ind. App. 458 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 8, 1910

Ruhl, supra, the court said: “There is, however, at least one paragraph of the answer which is clearly bad, and that is the paragraph which pleads want of consideration. … , and its holder can transfer it to others with the like immunity.

Taylor v. Ford Motor Co.

944 N.E.2d 78 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 1, 2011

In reviewing the trial court’s factual findings and judgment, we will reverse only if they are clearly erroneous. Id. … the Legislature to definitively establish that the lessees of temporary employees are joint employers and not third-party tortfeasors.”

In Re KJA

790 N.E.2d 155 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 2003

In summary, not only did the juvenile statutes prohibit the court from requiring anyone aside from the county to pay for services provided for K.J.A., the statutes that establish the Bureau clearly prohibit the Division from … s finding that K.J.A. qualified for services was not tantamount to the Division finding that the Bureau would pay for any services for which K.J.A. qualified. As we said above, the Division approved the A.L.J.'

In re the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: O.G., II (Minor Child) and K.T. (Mother) & O.G. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services

65 N.E.3d 1080 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2016

[19] Exhibits 39 and 40 are clearly hearsay, but were admitted under the exception for business records. … In making that determination, we must consider whether the evidence clearly and convincingly supports the findings, and the findings clearly and convincingly support the court statement is no less

Young v. Adams

830 N.E.2d 138 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 12, 2005

Young must establish that the trial court's findings are clearly erroneous, which occurs when a review of the record leaves us firmly convinced that a mistake has been made. See id. … Adams did not establish that his actions were performed clearly and exclusively in reliance on the agreement. See Sourbier, 101 Ind.App. at 689 , 200 N.E. at 725 .

First National Bank & Trust Co. v. Smith

113 Ind. App. 29 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 1942

The right of a testator to appoint a successor executor being established, the appellant’s right, following the resignation of the State Bank as the executor of the last will of Albert J. … Stahl, deceased, to qualify as a successor executor is governed by the same rules and provisions that applied to qualifying the primary appointee of the testator.

Campbell v. Board of School Commissioners

908 N.E.2d 1234 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 10, 2009

Corp. of Brown County, 534 N.E.2d 748 (Ind.1989) (permitting disproportionate representation temporarily during establishment of redistricting plan.) … Although the statute may have limited applicability here because there were two "ballots" for two at-large positions with differing terms, the legislation clearly illustrates intent to avoid disproportionate representation

Glenn Patrick Bradford v. State of Indiana

988 N.E.2d 1192 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 29, 2013

However, Davie was clearly qualified to discuss fire investigation procedures and the potential causes and characteristics of fire. … Still, it was well established that for a witness to qualify as an expert in a specific field, the subject matter must be related to some scientific field beyond the knowledge of the average lay person, and the witness

Think Tank Software Development Corp. d/b/a Think Tank Networking Technologies Group v. Chester, Inc., Mike Heinhold, John Mario, Joel Parker, Thomas Guelinas

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 7, 2013

To invoke this doctrine, the matters decided in the earlier appeal must clearly appear to be the only 7 possible construction of an opinion. Id. … WILNER’S QUALIFICATIONS Chester argues that Wilner is not qualified to render an opinion on causation.

The City of Indianapolis, and Indiana Department of Environmental Management v. Moran Electric Service, Inc. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 4, 2020

Moran argued that IDEM improperly issued the NFA Letter because the remedial goals established for the site had not been met. … So, the applicable statutes and rules would clearly have precedent in this instance. Joint Appendix of Appellants Vol. II at 63.

Davis v. Eagle Products, Inc.

501 N.E.2d 1099 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 1986

Walker could have been cross-examined during the deposition, his out of court statement qualified for an exception to the hearsay rule. Patterson v. … In order to establish an abuse of discretion, we must determine that the trial court's ruling was clearly against logic and effect of facts and circumstances before the court, as well as the reasonable and probable inferences

Miller v. Kifer

75 Ind. App. 198 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 17, 1921

That there is an exception to such general rule under which such declarations are admissible, we admit, but it only applies where the declaration accompanies an act proper to be given in evidence and in some way qualifies … While the exception under consideration is well recognized, it should not be extended beyond its established limitations. Baker v. Baker, supra.

Houin v. Burger by Burger

590 N.E.2d 593 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 20, 1992

public invitee or a business visitor; thus, he may not take advantage of the higher standard of care which benefits invitees. 2 Further, if Ty were a licensee while on Betty’s premises, which we do not find, he could not establish … In Bonnie’s deposition, she admitted that she paid certain sums for utilities and rent, which clearly qualify her and her children as ten *598 ants in Betty’s building. Record at 102-103; 106; see Record at 121-122.

Christina Lyons v. Lilliam Henegar, Trusteee of Bloomington Township (mem. dec)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 30, 2017

[8] Findings will only be set aside if they are clearly erroneous. Id. “Findings are clearly erroneous only when the record contains no facts to support them either directly or by inference.” Id. … This was not an unforeseen circumstance that would qualify as an emergency.

Zurich-American Insurance Group v. Wynkoop

746 N.E.2d 985 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 23, 2001

Thus, the sole issue is whether Wynkoop qualifies as an insured under the Policy. … Clearly then, for number twenty-nine to apply, it must be entered next to a coverage on the Declarations page. We do not find the symbol twenty-nine anywhere in the Declarations.

Scoopmire v. Taflinger

114 Ind. App. 419 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 1, 1944

Alger (1851) (Mass.), 7* Cush. 53, 85, is quoted in defining the police power: “The power vested in the legislature by the Constitution to make, ordain, and establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes, … One of the most sacred of the inalienable rights of the individual citizen is his right to liberty — which includes immunity from the unlawful seizure and detention of his person by any agency of the state.

Cunningham Ex Rel. Cunningham v. Bakker Produce, Inc.

712 N.E.2d 1002 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 19, 1999

The supreme court concluded that the IRUS does not create immunity from liability for the premises owner with regard to his own actions. Id. … Drake by Drake, 649 N.E.2d at 1030 (owner of silo failed to establish that plaintiffs activities were subject to the IRUS).

Creasy v. Rusk

696 N.E.2d 442 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1998

The designated materials establish that Rusk suffered some impairment of his mental capacity. Rusk was admitted to BHC because he suffered from memory loss and confusion. … The Record, however, does not establish the degree of Rusk’s impairment or its effect on his ability to control his actions or understand the consequences thereof.

Wilkins v. Newkirk, Trustee

85 Ind. App. 663 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 1927

Appellee Newkirk, is and since January, 1923, has at all times been the properly qualified and acting trustee, and appellees Rhea, Kantz and Vincent, have at all times for the same period been the properly qualified and acting … E. 867 : “The statute under consideration clearly leaves it to the advisory board to determine whether an emergency exists to issue bonds for a new schoolhouse, and, of course, the courts could not decide that question.”

Patricia Ann Brown, CPA v. Brown

776 N.E.2d 394 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 8, 2002

Thus, we find that Pat qualifies for remedies under Indiana Code § 34-24-3-1 due to the theft of her credit by Brown. I. … It was established for the protection of the court so that the court might be relieved of the burden of controverting the arguments advanced for a reversal where such a burden rests with the appellee.” Kokomo Ctr.