Case law

Emergency Physicians of Indianapolis v. Pettit

714 N.E.2d 1111 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1999

Timothy could establish that his care was within the standard of care was by presenting expert testimony on that issue.” R. at 620. … Timothy could establish that his care fell within the applicable standard of care was by presenting expert testimony on that issue.

Walker v. McTague

737 N.E.2d 404 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 2000

the Walkers and McTague Properties entered into a stipulated entry for relief from stay, which was approved by the bankruptcy judge, providing that McTague Properties would have 120 days to market the business and seek a qualified … On review, we do not set aside the trial court’s findings or judgment unless they are clearly erroneous. Ind. Trial R. 52(A).

Indiana Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Co. v. Vincel

452 N.E.2d 418 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 15, 1983

The Vincels argue that IC 27-7-6-2 establishes the minimum category of persons who must be insured under automobile policies in Indiana. … Parenthetically, we also emphasize that Joseph could not qualify as an insured under the liability portion of the policy either.

Leonard v. Leonard

877 N.E.2d 896 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 14, 2007

Findings are clearly erroneous only when the record contains no facts to support them either directly or by inference. Id. A judgment is clearly erroneous if it applies the wrong legal standard to properly found facts. … Valuing a pension requires a court to determine (1) what evidence must be presented to establish the value of the benefit, (2) what date must be used to assign a dollar amount to the benefit, and (3) how much of the benefit

Halterman v. Adams County Board of Commissioners

991 N.E.2d 987 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 2013

We will reverse only when the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id. Halterman argues Dr. … If the defendant establishes the lack of that causation, summary judgment is appropriate. Id.

Mary J. Coate v. Timothy D. Coate (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 31, 2016

[Timothy] shall pay this amount by [Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO)] from his [TSP] account with any balance paid within [thirty] days thereafter.” … “A judgment is clearly erroneous if it applies the wrong legal standard to properly found facts.” Id.

Sports, Inc. v. Gilbert

431 N.E.2d 534 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 1982

Clearly, when Riggs was in the speedway parking lot he could only have been arrested for a misdemeanor. A private citizen making such an arrest would be liable for false imprisonment. Knott, supra; Golibart, supra. … If the Sports employees are immune from liability for their failure to use powers granted to them by the state, their private employer is likewise immune.

B.K.C. v. State

781 N.E.2d 1157 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 2003

Specifically, BK.C. argues that his determinate wardship was erroneous because "a prerequisite to determining if a juvenile offender qualifies for a [determinate] sentence is a determination by the judge under Indiana Code … The qualifying offenses include ten with sexual elements (ie., Ind.Code §§ 5-2-12-4(a)(1) (10)) and two, kidnapping and erim-inal confinement, where the victim is less than eighteen years of age (i.e., Ind.Code §§ 5-2-12-

Lehman v. Shroyer

721 N.E.2d 365 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 1999

A judgment is clearly erroneous only if a review of the record leaves us with a firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. … The court held that the couple’s letter did not qualify as the type of notice required by the statute because the letter failed to identify a deceptive act, namely the advertisement. Id.

Hibbard v. Hibbard

118 Ind. App. 292 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 23, 1947

Proof of the existence of such a relation between the parties establishes prima facie that the dominant party to such relation occupies a position of trust and confidence which he must not abuse.” … Army Air Force where he qualified as a pilot, and the court takes judicial knowledge of the rigorous physical and mental requirements of such service.

Judy Kirby v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 10, 2015

The standard by which we review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel is well established. … This error was not cured as the surrounding instructions “did not serve to qualify the mandatory presumption.” Id.

Jason Tibbs v. State of Indiana

59 N.E.3d 1005 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 2016

Finally, like Lashbrook and Pelley, Tibbs wholly failed to establish any direct, material connection between McCarty and Rison’s murder similar to that which was established by forensic evidence in … But the trial court’s findings clearly establish that there was not, in fact, an agreement between Rickey and the State.

Forrest Brown v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 19, 2015

“An abuse of discretion occurs if the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances.” Jones v. State, 812 N.E.2d 820, 826 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). … [8] With respect to the nature of Brown’s offense, we note that Brown’s arrearage is more than double the amount required to qualify the offense as a class C felony, and that Brown failed to pay any child

Locklayer v. State

162 Ind. App. 64 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 30, 1974

However, closely related to the defense of entrapment, yet clearly distinguishable is an additional rule of probable cause applied by our courts for the protection of the defendant. … Further, by reason of his past experience with drugs, a narcotics addict may be properly qualified to render an opinion that the substance he injected into his body contained a narcotic drug with which he has demonstrated

Gallagher v. Indiana State Election Board

579 N.E.2d 649 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 1991

As a result, a resident of a voting precinet who is otherwise qualified cannot vote in the new precinet if he or she became a precinet resident within thirty days prior to an election. … Const. art. 2, § 2 is unambiguous and clearly does not provide a "day of record" for purposes of voting and to that extent we agree with the trial court.

Bostick v. State

804 N.E.2d 218 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 4, 2004

The evidence that established or was presented to the Court at trial, the Court previously found to have established beyond a reasonable doubt, include the following dates of birth for the children. … Because of the absence of a jury determination that qualifying aggravating circumstances were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, we must therefore vacate the trial court's sentence of life without parole. Bostick v.

Smith v. State

643 N.E.2d 944 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 1994

The former provision clearly states that a vacancy in the office of judge of any court is to be filled by appointment by the governor, such appointment to expire "when a successor shall have been elected and qualified." … Our constitution clearly reflects the intent to maintain as elected officers the judges of courts having general jurisdiction. Ind.

Stout v. Kokomo Manor Apartments

677 N.E.2d 1060 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 17, 1997

The evidence therefore is sufficient to support the determination that the act of molestation qualified as “criminal activity” as provided in the lease agreement. … An act of child molestation against another resident at the apartment complex qualifies Stout’s son as “a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals.”

James R. Johnson v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 24, 2012

If Johnson used only his hand to touch the child’s vagina, it would not qualify as deviate sexual conduct. See Ind. Code § 35-41-1-9. … In the latter scenario, a sufficient factual basis may be established by evidence aside from a defendant’s statements. Id.

Indiana Department of Public Welfare v. Crescent Manor, Inc.

416 N.E.2d 470 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 16, 1981

. § 1396 et seq., provides for federal-state sharing of costs for medical and rehabilitation services afforded to certain qualified individuals “whose income and resources are insufficient to meet the costs of necessary medical … court finds such finding, decision or determination of such agency is: (1) Arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law; or (2) Contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege or immunity