Case law

Howard v. State

672 N.E.2d 944 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 23, 1996

State, our supreme court stated: "To qualify as fundamental error,' the error must be a substantial blatant violation of basic principles rendering the trial unfair to the defendant.... … However, we concluded that under the particular circumstances of that case, the instructional error regarding the specific intent to kill was clearly harmless. Id. at 592 .

McGary v. State

421 N.E.2d 747 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 1981

The special judge qualified and assumed jurisdiction on December 2, 1976. … We believe the facts of this case are clearly distinguishable from Floyd v.

In the Paternity of M.S., L.S. and S.S. Maria Arriaga v. State of Indiana as Next Friend Gabriela Ivonne De Landa, (Mother), and Samuel Salazar, (Father)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 2020

The trial court, however, found that Arriaga did not qualify as a de facto custodian. … She bears the burden of convincing us that the trial court’s judgment is clearly erroneous.

State of Indiana v. Michael Stone

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 31, 2020

[14] The Court observed that statements by informants have qualified as against penal interest and been found sufficient to establish probable cause for issuance of a search warrant in cases where: … We cannot agree, as the facts of this case are clearly distinguishable.

Brazauskas v. Fort Wayne-South Bend Diocese, Inc.

714 N.E.2d 253 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1999

a breach of contract action together with other causes of action which civil courts are clearly able to resolve.” … Brazauskas also attacked defendants’ assertions of qualified privilege *258 and of her consent to the publication of the alleged defamatory statements.

Shuttleworth v. State

469 N.E.2d 1210 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 1984

There is no doubt that the evidence before the jury clearly shows nothing but very minimal payments for groceries, if that, from July, 1978, through December, 1980, for the support of his children. … He is qualified to pursue other employment; he simply did not do so. The jury was well within its bounds when it rendered its verdict, and we find that verdict was not contrary to law.

Ernst v. Underwriters National Assurance Co.

178 Ind. App. 77 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 23, 1978

The Supreme Court of Indiana clearly stated in State v. … Section 23 clearly creates a privilege personal to client.

Eichstadt v. Frisch's Restaurants, Inc.

879 N.E.2d 1207 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 31, 2008

We will only reverse if the findings and judgment are clearly erroneous. Id. Initially, Eichstadt argues that the trial court applied an improper legal standard in ruling on the motion to dismiss. … As to whether Campbell was the alter ego of Frisch’s, no evidence was presented to establish that Campbell had either ownership or control of Frisch’s.

Indianapolis Horse Patrol, Inc. v. Ward

138 Ind. App. 368 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 1966

to defame, and creates in them a legal immunity for any word, act or deed spoken or done by them. … This is the method employed herein by appellee in an attempt to establish the tort of common law conspiracy.

Dean v. State

901 N.E.2d 648 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 2009

The burden then shifts back to the defendant to establish that he is entitled to *654 discharge by showing that the trial court's explanation was clearly erroneous. Id. … Because Dean established that the three congestion orders in question were factually inaccurate, he established a prima facie case adequate for discharge. See James, 716 N.E.2d at 939 .

Carter v. State

956 N.E.2d 167 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 2011

The mere fact that an alleged error implicates constitutional issues does not establish it was fundamental. Schmidt, 816 N.E.2d at 945 . … Courts consider the statutes, charging instruments, evidence, and arguments of counsel in order to determine whether the facts establishing one crime are the same as the facts establishing one or more elements of another.

Zubrenic v. Dunes Valley Mobile Home Park, Inc.

797 N.E.2d 802 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 22, 2003

In the area of negligence arising out of a landlord-tenant relationship, the law seems well established. … In addition, the rental agreement which was designated as evidence clearly states that the rental agreement was for "Lot # 112 Seot Ct." and not for the mobile home on lot 112. Id.

Skrzypczak v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

668 N.E.2d 291 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 1996

To qualify for coverage from Mutual, an insured must be accident and ticket free for three years, and be insured by Casualty for at least one year. … In evaluating whether the findings and judgment are clearly erroneous, we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the witnesses' credibility. Id.

Ind. & Mich. Elec. Co. v. PUBLIC SERV. COM'N

495 N.E.2d 779 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 29, 1986

The Commission also has authority to establish and review utility rates. … Section 9 defines "order" as "an agency action of particular applicability that determines the legal rights, duties, privileges, immunities, or other legal interests of one (1) or more specific persons."

Ayanna Wright and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 62, Local 4009, AFL-CIO v. City of Gary, Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 15, 2012

Gardner determined that she was fully qualified for the GFCSC’s administrative assistant position. … diminish that policy as the GFCSC’s chairman determined that Wright was fully qualified for the position.

Indiana State Ethics Commission v. Nelson

656 N.E.2d 1172 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 24, 1996

The reason for the establishment of this principle is obvious: a person cannot serve two masters at the same time and the public interest should not be entrusted to an official who has a pecuniary, personal or private interest … Clearly, a State Forester's engagement in the lucrative business of buying and selling forest land and products is incompatible with the duties and responsibilities of a State Forester. Our analysis is complete.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of S.D. (Child) and L v. (Father) L v. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 19, 2019

On November 13, 2018, the court permanently terminated all rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations pertaining to the parent-child relationship between Father and S.D. … The court also instructed Father about how to establish paternity. (CHINS Tr. Vol. VI at 10, 14.) Father failed to establish his paternity of S.D. sooner; he cannot now allege that as error on appeal.

Samuel Jude Clark v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 27, 2019

Specifically, Robey asserted that one of the predicate felonies used to establish his habitual offender status, which he had admitted to, did not qualify under I.C. § 35-50-2-8. … We, however, do not find that the trial court’s order clearly specified the conviction that was being enhanced.

Miller v. Miller

763 N.E.2d 1009 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 2002

Notwithstanding Wife's argument, our review of the record before us does not establish that the trial court failed to properly value the marital home. … Testimony at the final hearing revealed that he had a retirement plan from former employment and that a Qualified Domestic Relation Order (QUADRO) had been obtained against the retirement plan. 1 The expectation of the parties

Connelly v. Hundley

96 Ind. App. 439 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 1933

Hundley was duly appointed receiver of Citizens Bank, Jonesboro, by this court, on September 22, 1930, and duly qualified as such receiver and is now the receiver of said bank. … Connelly, for the amount of the said certificate of deposit. (2) “It clearly appears upon the face of said complaint that the said certificate of deposit was issued to *443 the said Harry L.