Case law

Howard Larky v. Camp Livingston, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2025

(“Absent such a showing of prejudice, we conclude that City did not waive the defense of governmental immunity.”). … In the context of the entire exculpatory clause, the court held that “these words clearly demonstrate that the Release encompasses negligence.” Id.

Sears Roebuck and Co. v. Manuilov

715 N.E.2d 968 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 1999

The direct questioning of the plaintiff and his careful answers appeared to be clearly designed to leave the jury with a false impression. … We are therefore led to the conclusion that expert scientific testimony is re- quired to establish and explain the complex causal relationship between Manuilov’s fall and his injuries.

Warner, Etc., Admrs. v. Keiser, Etc., Exrs.

93 Ind. App. 547 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 1931

Maring, his surviving widow, named as executrix, qualified and entered upon the discharge of her duties; Joel M. … Maring, deceased; on October 26, 1926, the appellees were appointed and qualified as executors of the last will and testament of Grace K.

Coffer v. Arndt

732 N.E.2d 815 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 20, 2000

Further, such information was clearly relevant to the underlying issue of when Coffer knew or should have known of the alleged malpractice. Citing Coghill v. … Article I, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution, the Privileges and Immunities Clause states: "The General Assembly shall not grant te any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms

Kelly v. Ladywood Apartments

622 N.E.2d 1044 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 8, 1993

nor to invited guests.... ” Clearly, the statute was to have an affect as to non-invitees. … All the elements must be established before the doctrine applies. Pier v.

Fry v. State

885 N.E.2d 742 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 9, 2008

An abuse of discretion occurs if a trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Id. … However, Indiana Evidence Rule 902 is one exception to the general requirement that other evidence establish the authenticity of an exhibit. Id.

Schmidt v. State

816 N.E.2d 925 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 28, 2004

establishes only that he refused to take the test. … Furthermore, this court has concluded that chiropractors are generally not qualified to serve as experts in cases involving physicians.

McNear v. Roberson

12 Ind. App. 87 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 26, 1895

Counsel insist that the evidence fails to establish a promise to pay, sufficient to avoid the statute of limitations, and thus revive the cause of action. Section 302, R. S. 1894 (section 301, R. … For the fault and laches of the creditor in enforcing his claim, the debtor and his heirs are granted immunity.

Cohoon v. Cohoon

770 N.E.2d 885 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2002

The Child Support Worksheet Supplement clearly states that the Father's extended visitation of 15 weeks annually "certainly qualifies for regular visitation" and that the Father is entitled to a deduction. 25. … While the parties' computation of Father's child support obligation may have been confusing, 6 the settlement agreement, which was incorporated into the trial court's dissolution order, clearly establishes his child support

Stidham v. Whelchel

684 N.E.2d 548 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1997

A denial of the motion is presumptively valid and the movant must demonstrate that the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Id. … The plaintiffs burden to come forward with evidence which would establish jurisdiction does not arise until a challenge by the defendant. Id.

In Re the Guardianship of A.L.C.

902 N.E.2d 343 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 12, 2009

The findings will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. Id. Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when the record lacks any facts or reasonable inferences to support them. Id. … A judgment is clearly erroneous when unsupported by the findings of fact and conclusions thereon. Id.

Brancheau v. Weddle

555 N.E.2d 1315 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 1990

To the contrary, it establishes that Denise and her mother, with their incomes pooled, are unable to afford basic necessities such as dental care for Denise. … No evidence was offered by Brancheau of available work for which Denise was qualified, which would enable her to better her financial condition.

Columbian Rope Co. v. Todd

631 N.E.2d 941 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 29, 1994

An abuse of discretion occurs only if the court's determination is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. McCullough v. … We hold that the trial court did not err in allowing McCann to testify about the insufficiency of Columbian's warnings, MeCann did not testify to anything that could not have been testified to by any similarly qualified expert

In the Matter of F.S., T.W., M.F., and B.F. (Minor Children) v. Ind. Dept. of Child Services for Crawford County

53 N.E.3d 582 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 12, 2016

The defendants asserted qualified immunity, and the district court granted their motion for summary judgment. … In order to determine whether qualified immunity shielded the defendants from liability for the plaintiffs’ constitutional claims, the reviewing court first had to determine whether the facts alleged showed

Indiana Telephone Ass'n v. Public Service Commission

477 N.E.2d 911 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 13, 1985

This latter proposition was emphasized by the supreme court in General Telephone Company when it noted "section 54-601(b) [I.C. § 8-1-2-88] clearly distinguishes between a territorial certificate issued pursuant to the Act … The Act also established a procedure whereby a public utility operating under a municipal franchise contract could surrender such contract and accept in lieu thereof an "indeterminate permit."

Bowen Engineering Corp. v. W.P.M. Inc.

557 N.E.2d 1358 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 14, 1990

The established federal rule is that consolidation without notice is not reversible error absent a showing of prejudice. See also Holly Sugar Corp. v. … This statute clearly makes it the Board’s duty to see that such information (the plan—Sec. II of the Board’s form) is submitted.

Davis v. State

948 N.E.2d 843 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 12, 2011

Davis objected, arguing that the State had failed to establish an adequate foundation. … Our Supreme Court has stated that “[although a witness may not be qualified to offer expert testimony under Indiana Evidence Rule 702 [ (Rule 702) ], the witness may be qualified as a ‘skilled witness’ (sometimes referred

Indiana State Department of Public Welfare v. Foster

542 N.E.2d 234 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 17, 1989

In order to qualify for Medicaid Foster had a resource limitation of $2250 or less. See 470 IAC 9.1-3-17(a). … However, IND.CODE 30-2-10-1 et seq. permits the establishment of a funeral trust with the money used to create the trust not counting against the financial resources of the applicant.

Donald B. Kite, Sr. v. Alexandra Curlin

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 2019

Thus, Curlin was clearly ineligible for the District 2 seat on the School Board. … established that Curlin was an ineligible candidate.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management v. Schnippel Construction, Inc.

778 N.E.2d 407 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 28, 2002

This evidence, argued IDEM, established that the 260 linear feet threshold had been crossed. … inspector to conduct an inspection and a qualified asbestos removal contractor for the removal of RACM.