Case law

Messer v. Cerestar USA, Inc.

803 N.E.2d 1240 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 2004

Jarvis, 575 N.E.2d 992 (Ind.1991), our Supreme Court established a test to be utilized when determining whether a duty exists. … Indiana Evidence Rule 702 requires that an expert be qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.

Connie Ehrlich v. Starke Solar, LLC d/b/a Mammoth Solar

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 7, 2023

Remonstrators argued the question before the court – whether farmland could qualify as an ERA – was a question of law, rather than facts. … intent more clearly.

Mark Adrian Hughes v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 14, 2019

We review evidentiary decisions for an abuse of discretion and will reverse only when the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1007 … “[T]he repeated commission of similar crimes is not enough to qualify for the exception to the general rule.

Lake County Trust Co., as Trustee for Lake County Trust 5434, James L. Gagan and Eugene H. Deutsch v. United Consumers Club, Inc. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 26, 2015

Clearly, the premise of the trial court’s ruling is that the dismissal of the case in United I was something “other than a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.” … State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs, the granting of United’s motion in the present case clearly acted as an adjudication on the merits against the Trust.

John Green v. Stephen Robertson, Commissioner, Indiana Department of Insurance

56 N.E.3d 682 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 5, 2016

Concluding the trial court’s findings and judgment are not clearly erroneous, we affirm. … The liability of a qualified health care provider is limited to the first $250,000.00 in damages. Ind. Code § 34-18-14-3(b).

S R v. T D

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 2024

Initially, we note that, despite the DNA test showing that Putative Father is Child’s biological father, he qualifies as a “putative father” under Indiana Code section 31-9-2-100. … Rather, the applicable statutes very clearly establish that, unless and until Indiana Code section 31-19-5-1(b) applies, a putative father is required to register.

Kevin Dowdy v. State of Indiana

83 N.E.3d 755 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 7, 2017

“We defer to the trial court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous, and we will not reweigh the evidence.” Id. … And the inquiry is not as forgiving as the one employed in the distinct context of deciding whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity for a constitutional or statutory violation.

Holtzleiter v. Holtzleiter

944 N.E.2d 502 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 25, 2011

An abuse of discretion occurs when the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court, including any reasonable inferences therefrom. … The twelve-month requirement is clearly met because the divorce decree was issued on August 22, 2008, and Father filed his petition to modify child support on September 24, 2009.

In Re: the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: K.R., J.T.R., J.L.R., & E.R. (Minor Children) A.B. (Mother) and J.R. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2019

In sum, the Indiana Supreme Court held that the SCAN reports did not qualify as business records. Id. … A judgment is clearly erroneous if the findings do not support the trial court’s conclusions or the conclusions do not support the judgment. Id.

Reginald Dillard v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 2023

Judge Sutton further found that Forensic Specialist Chapman had “misled [Deputy Prosecutor] Becker into believing that he was qualified to conduct the type of latent print comparisons that [had] exist … of bias or prejudice may be established if a judge’s order is sufficiently egregious.

Michael L. Harris v. State of Indiana, Elkhart County Sheriff's Dept.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 2013

FILED Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of Jan 23 2013, 8:49 am establishing … As a result of the inherent immunity rooted in the Supremacy Clause, federal officers are immune “for actions reasonable and necessary in the discharge of their federal responsibilities.” Wyoming v.

Nolan Clayton v. Gregory Smith

113 N.E.3d 693 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2018

A witness not qualified to offer expert testimony under Evidence Rule 702 may be qualified as a “skilled witness” or “skilled lay observer.” Id. at 922. … It had not been established that Progressive was or was not defendant Clayton’s insurer.

Kline v. Kline

455 N.E.2d 407 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 1983

But in some few cases absence may be a policy, instead of the result of military service, and discretion is vested in the courts to see that the immunities of the Act are not put to such unworthy use." 98 N.E.2d at 511 . … Ind.Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 53.5 reads in pertinent part: "Upon motion, trial may be postponed or continued in the discretion of the court, and shall be allowed upon a showing of good cause established by affidavit

Glenny Cornwell and James Cornwell v. Bloomington Housing Authority (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 2018

Specifically, Cornwell argues that her visits with her doctor in Fishers, Indiana, where she received substance abuse treatment for opioid addition, qualified as “substance abuse or mental health counseling … Therefore, we conclude the trial court’s decision was not clearly erroneous.

Eldridge v. State

438 N.E.2d 1033 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 1982

Nesi-us and established that Mr. Nesius had known Eldridge and his family for several years. Mr. … The evidence of El-dridge’s guilt was clearly established beyond a reasonable doubt through the testimony of two of the other men who participated in the crimes with which he was charged and the investigating police officers

Board of Commissioners v. Kime

66 Ind. App. 620 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 1918

Imel was the duly appointed, qualified and acting health commissioner of said county, and. on said day appellee ascertained that William Arnold and family, of Washington township, said county, were afflicted with smallpox … The fact that the means employed to accomplish the end in view incidentally benefits indigent persons unable to pay for their necessary care and treatment does not change the application of the law, but is clearly within

State v. Young

855 N.E.2d 329 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 2006

seeking judicial relief has been prejudiced by an agency action that is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Additionally, such a suggestion would run directly contrary to established precedent found in multiple cases from our supreme court and this court.

In re the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.L., C.L., E.L., M.L., and J.P. (Minor Children) and N.L. (Mother) N.L. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 31, 2018

[Mother] has clearly not improved her ability to provide necessary food, shelter, clothing, support or any sort of stability for [Children.] … As the State correctly points out, “Mother did not seek Menser to be qualified as an expert, nor did the court do so during trial.” Appellee’s Br. p. 33.

Old Colony Insurance v. Kolmer

78 Ind. App. 479 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 1923

We also observe that the term “equipment” is not limited or qualified in any way, except that it must be of the automobile. … We are clearly of the opinion that it cannot be done, as to do so would give too much importance to a comparatively immaterial fact.

In Re the Appeal of Associated Sign & Post, Inc

485 N.E.2d 917 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 26, 1985

An agency established or designated under this section has no jurisdiction over the state or any of its agencies. … Clearly, this is what the Bloomington Human Rights Commission sought to do when it promulgated Rule 4.