Case law

In the Matter of the Guardianship of Shirla Gonzalez Xitumul: Miguel Hernandez Jeronimo

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 2019

under the scheme established by federal immigration law.” 114 N.E.3d at 859. … Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 19A-GU-948 | November 20, 2019 Page 12 of 17  never clearly articulated that purpose to the court.

Galloway v. Hadley

881 N.E.2d 667 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 22, 2008

[Wjhile the plaintiff does claim some economic loss from not being on the approved list that loss is not qualifiable [sic] and cannot be judged. … The second criterion is whether plaintiff has established a likelihood of success at trial.

Midwest Psychological Center, Inc. v. Indiana Department of Administration

959 N.E.2d 896 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 2011

“A judgment on the pleadings is proper only when there are no genuine issues of material fact and when the facts shown by the pleadings clearly establish that the non-moving party cannot in any way succeed under the facts … The 2007 amendments added non-profit corporations to the definitions of MBE and "owned or controlled” and added a specific definition for qualified minority or women's non-profit corporation.

Valerie D. Alexander v. Angela F. Trapp Trapp Law, LLC and Lisa Alexander (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 2018

be Dec 05 2018, 10:29 am regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK court except for the purpose of establishing … [12] “For immunity from liability to exist based on absolute privilege, the statement in question must be ‘relevant and pertinent to the litigation or bear some relation thereto.’”

Hall v. State

796 N.E.2d 388 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 30, 2003

This is a threshold inquiry that must first be established before the trial judge may consider the presumption [of prejudice] ... … Only one of the above characteristics is necessary to qualify an individual as an expert. Id.

Schilling v. HUNTINGTON CTY. COMMUNITY SCH. CORP.

898 N.E.2d 385 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2008

. *388 DISCUSSION AND DECISION Our standard of review for summary judgment appeals is well established. Asbestos Corp. v. Akaiwa, 872 N.E.2d 1095, 1096 (Ind.Ct.App.2007) (citing Owens Corning Fiberglass Corp. v. … Being a volunteer firefighter clearly qualifies as `any other business or occupation.' Id.

Avemco Insurance Co. v. State Ex Rel. McCarty

812 N.E.2d 108 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 2004

A party seeking a preliminary injunction must establish a prima facie case at the preliminary injunction hearing. Id. … In Fidelity, the stop loss insurer sought a court determination that it was providing health insurance in order to qualify for a tax deduction, and the court held that it was. Id.

Bass v. Salyer

923 N.E.2d 961 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 17, 2010

Accordingly, the trial court's judgment on this issue is clearly erroneous: 2. … Stated differently, they constitute property rights of a qualified or restricted nature. Id. Ctr. Townhouse Corp. v. City of Mishawaka, 882 N.E.2d 762, 767-68 (Ind.Ct.App.2008), trans. denied.

Roman Marblene Co., Inc. v. Reginald Baker

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 2017

Baker met his burden of establishing a prima facie case under the McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … [Agency’s] order only if it is (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to a constitutional right, power, privilege or immunity

Miller v. State

167 Ind. App. 271 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 17, 1975

We note first that it is well established that to preserve error for review, specific grounds must be stated at the time an objection is made. Smith v. State (1974), 159 Ind. App. 438 , 307 N.E.2d 875 . … Clearly, the circumstances of the first delivery were separate from the circumstances of the second delivery and/or possession. We find no merit in defendant’s first contention.

Ratner, Tr. v. City of Richmond

136 Ind. App. 578 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 13, 1965

E. 914 established the principle that equity may intervene to enjoin the commission of a crime. … Therefore all stéps taken under said power and grant of authority must clearly conform to the terms of the grant.

Koziol v. Vojvoda

662 N.E.2d 985 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 18, 1996

After establishing that the area of the accident was well-lit, the following colloquy occurred: Q. … First, we note that Officer Fandrei was qualified to give his expert opinion.

Vollmar Ex Rel. Vollmar v. Rupright

517 N.E.2d 1240 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 1988

To allow Bradley to enjoy the benefits of a reduction in attorneys' fees without incurring any of the cost of the pursuit of such a reduction clearly would be inequitable. … While in this case Bradley holds the dual role of beneficiary and personal representative, this does not mean that funds destined for Bradley as a beneficiary are immune from payment of fees incurred by Bradley as personal

Department of Natural Resources v. Evans

493 N.E.2d 1295 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 1986

Although Evans was qualified, she was not hired and the evidence indicated she was denied employment in retaliation for the federal lawsuit. … The Court finds Evans clearly mitigated any loss she might have had. The Court finds that Evans lost wages in the amount of $8,144.00.

Bova v. Roig

604 N.E.2d 1 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 1992

Bova asserts that two separate and distinct occurrences of malpractice were established, and therefore, the verdict was within the limit of the Act. … Where the intent is clearly expressed by the language of the legislation, we may not construe the statute to mean something other than what it plainly states on its face. Id.

M.W.S. v. M.S.S.

923 N.E.2d 458 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 2010

s birth, these factors do not, as the court concludes, establish Father's disregard for the welfare of L.J.S. … Assuming without deciding that Grandparents qualify as de facto custodians, they must still overcome the strong presumption in favor of Father, the natural parent, in order to gain custody of L.J.S.

Bei Bei Shuai v. State

966 N.E.2d 619 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 2012

A decision is an abuse of discretion when it "is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances." Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184, 188 (Ind.2007). … I conclude that by charging Shuai with the intentional killing of a viable fetus, the State failed to establish the essential element of that crime, i.e., that A.S. was a viable fetus.

Meier v. Pearlman

74 Ind. Dec. 252 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 1980

Absent fraud, collusion, malicious or tortious conduct on the part of an attorney, the rule is equally well established that no liability to third parties arises from the attorney’s conduct as an attorney for another. … of a fraudulent or unlawful act.” * * * (Emphasis added) The court held in McDonald that the rule of immunity was properly applied.

Zemco Manufacturing, Inc. v. Pecoraro

703 N.E.2d 1064 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 11, 1998

We will reverse a trial court’s decision only for an abuse of discretion, that is, only when the trial court’s action is clearly erroneous and against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id. … Excluding the evidence regarding the Ze-men case was clearly erroneous. Viewing Zemco’s claims only in terms of the Agreement does not accurately portray the context in which the claims arose.

Campbell v. Porter County Board of Commissioners

565 N.E.2d 1164 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 28, 1991

The record in this case shows the Shift Captains have failed to establish the first part of the Connick test. There is no indication they were speaking on matters of “public concern.” … Taken as a whole, the letter clearly indicates that the Shift Captains felt slighted by the Board. Such a grievance is a matter of personal interest and not subject to judicial oversight.