Case law

Board of Commissioners of Adams County v. Price

587 N.E.2d 1326 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 6, 1992

Clearly, there are cases on either end of the spectrum which will fall automatically into the category of discretionary or non-discretionary functions. … Immunity may be established by governmental defendants who can show that the challenged decision was discretionary because it resulted from a policy oriented decision-making process.

Northern Indiana Public Service Co. v. Dabagia

721 N.E.2d 294 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 27, 1999

Because there was no defamatory statement here, we do not reach NIPSCO’s defense of qualified immunity. See Conwell, 667 N.E.2d at 775 . … We do not reach NIPSCO’s defense of qualified immunity because there was no defamatory statement here. See Conwell, 667 N.E.2d at 775 .

State v. Carter

658 N.E.2d 618 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 1995

This policy prohibiting punitive damage awards against the State is established in other areas as well. … The general sanction provision does not warrant the trumping of the State's long established immunity from sanctions. See generally Atascadero State Hosp. v.

Bartholomew County and Bartholomew County Commissioners v. Doug Johnson and Lucretia Johnson v. C & H/M Excavating and Construction, Inc., and Christopher B. Burke Engineering, LTD.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 17, 2013

The party seeking immunity bears the burden of establishing its conduct comes within the Act. 2 See Gary Cmty. Sch. Corp. v. … Thus, for example, governmental immunity is not clearly conferred to shield a government-employed lifeguard, otherwise liable for a swimmer’s injuries by reason of the lifeguard’s intoxication and inattention

Chestnet v. K-Mart Corp.

529 N.E.2d 131 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 1988

Taken as true for our present purposes, this assertion does not establish that France made a defamatory statement. Rather, it merely establishes that France was screaming. … Screaming for help certainly does not qualify as a defamatory statement.

Elliott v. Rush Memorial Hospital

928 N.E.2d 634 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 11, 2010

We do not believe, however, that we ought to create broad immunity for certain types of defendants in a certain class of cases, where our legislature has already clearly spoken on the precise issue and provided for a more … The Defendants have not established that they are entitled to immunity as a matter of law under Section 9-30-6-6 against any civil claims Elliott might bring.

Dzierba v. City of Michigan City

798 N.E.2d 463 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 2003

Courts decide as a matter of law whether the ITCA confers immunity in a particular circumstance. Catt v. Board of Com'rs of Knox County, 779 N.E.2d 1 . The party seeking immunity bears the burden of establishing it. Id. … Clearly, in Garner, the natural condition of the waters of Lake Michigan was the "condition" referred to in I.C. § 34-18-8-8(1).

J.A.W. v. State

650 N.E.2d 1142 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 15, 1995

In addition, Toepp's motion alleged that he was entitled to absolute judicial immunity from suit or in the alternative that he was entitled to qualified immunity and immunity under the provisions of the Indiana Tort Claims … After considering Defendants' motions for more definite statement, Ind.Trial Rule 12(E), the trial court ordered JAW. to amend his complaint in order to more clearly identify the nature of his § 1983 claims.

City of Hammond v. Cipich Ex Rel. Skowronek

788 N.E.2d 1273 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 30, 2003

The water department claimed governmental immunity. … Although our application of the Benton decision established new precedent, we were careful to note that our decision was entirely consistent with the long recognized common law rule that a municipality is immune from liability

Americanos v. State

728 N.E.2d 895 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 23, 2000

As a result, he contends, less qualified applicants were hired for the positions. … Given this conclusion, we need not address the State’s claims of immunity and res judicata. Judgment affirmed. DARDEN, J., and FRIEDLANDER, J„ concur. . Ind.Code § 4-15-2-1 et seq.

State v. Reynolds

774 N.E.2d 902 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 2002

However, Reynolds did not establish at hearing that no offense was committed. … We presume that a statute is constitutional, and the presumption continues until clearly overcome by a showing to the contrary. Kleiman, 590 N.E.2d at 662 .

Wsk v. Mhsb

922 N.E.2d 671 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2010

W.S.K. clearly established the first element—he is African-American. The second element—W.S.K.'s qualifications—was the subject of discussion at oral argument. … Therefore, W.S.K. *689 did not establish that he was qualified for privileges at M.H.S.B.

Angelique Lockett and Lanetra Lockett v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana, Inc., and Cathy McGee

42 N.E.3d 119 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 17, 2015

[35] The Locketts first argue that the HCCA does not apply in this case because the HCCA “is clearly meant to provide health care providers some measure of immunity for their actions when relying on third … [52] On summary judgment, if the movant carries its burden to establish entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the burden shifts to the non-movant to present evidence establishing the existence of

Jackson v. Jones

804 N.E.2d 155 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 2004

In insurance policies, "an ambiguity is not affirmatively established simply because controversy exists and one party asserts an interpretation contrary to that asserted by the opposing party." Beam v. Wausau Ins. … uninsured motorist coverage pursuant to the Financial Re *159 sponsibility Act, IC 9-25-2-3, 2 and the requirements for uninsured and underin-sured motorist coverage, ICG 27-7-5-2, 3 the City of Indianapolis is statutorily immune

Weldon v. Universal Reagents, Inc.

714 N.E.2d 1104 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 19, 1999

The fact that medical doctors examined her, conducted evaluations of her, and made notations of her medical reaction to the diet did not establish a physician-patient relationship. … Biedron, 667 N.E.2d 752 (Ind.1996), relied upon by Appellee in its said Motion to Vacate are clearly distinguishable.

City of Hammond v. Cataldi

449 N.E.2d 1184 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 1983

Our Supreme Court has stated: "Clearly, the employment and supervision of deputies and employees in governmental offices, including the prosecutor's office, is a discretionary function." Foster v. … It is well-established that "liability to an individual for damages will not lie where the officer or the public body owes a duty to the general public as a whole, but it is not shown that the officer or public body owes

Januchowski v. Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District

905 N.E.2d 1041 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 7, 2009

The governmental entity seeking to establish immunity bears the burden of proving that its conduct comes within the ITCA. Peavler v. Monroe County Bd. of Comm'rs, 528 N.E.2d 40, 46 (Ind.1988). … We have held that Indiana's qualified consent to suit applies to FELA claims because FELA claims are tort claims. 6 Oshinski, 843 N.E.2d at 544 .

Slagle v. State

182 Ind. App. 5 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 1979

An expert can be “qualified” by evidence of formal training or practical experience. Culley v. State (1979), Ind.App., 385 N.E.2d 486 . … There, in a waiver hearing, the defendant clearly waived her right to object to the admission of the results of a polygraph test.

Scruby v. Waugh

476 N.E.2d 533 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 1985

Scruby, establishes that he was not a patient within the meaning of the Act. We do not agree. Rather, we determine that Waugh was a patient of Dr. … Bo-naventura on Detterline’s behalf, Detter-line qualified as a “patient” of Dr. Bona-ventura as the term is defined in 16-9.5-1 — 1(c).

Hochstedler v. St. Joseph County Solid Waste Management District

770 N.E.2d 910 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2002

In reviewing an alleged violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, our supreme court has established a two-part test. Collins v. Day, 644 N.E.2d 72, 80 (Ind.1994). … Because Resolution 5-97 is constitutional, the small claims court's judgment is not clearly erroneous. IIL.