Case law

Connie Duty, Coleen Grayson, and Frank Riffert v. The Estate of Hazel A. Geiselman (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2016

relating to their motions to consolidate and for emergency relief in the Amended Notice of 2 The trial court’s orders on Appellants’ motions to consolidate and for emergency relief did not qualify … As such, we conclude that Appellants have failed to establish that the trial court abused its discretion by denying their motion to correct error. IV.

Jaquan Davis v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2019

Absent an abuse of discretion, we will not disturb a trial court’s determination that a witness is qualified to testify as an expert and render an expert opinion. Ross v. State, 665 N.E.2d 599 (Ind. Ct. … An abuse of discretion occurs if the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court, or the reasonable, probable, and actual deductions to be

Oberst v. State

935 N.E.2d 1250 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 3, 2010

However, he did call Donita Farr, a Vincennes, Indiana, attorney who was qualified as a skilled witness, to testify regarding the applicable standards for defending clients in Indiana. … We accept findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, but we accord no deference to conclusions of law. Id. Oberst contends that his trial counsel was ineffective.

Davis v. State

835 N.E.2d 1102 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2005

When a defendant alleges that the trial court failed to identify or find a mitigating circumstance, the defendant must establish that the mitigating evidence is both significant and clearly supported by the record. … While Davis presents these factors as mitigators, he has not established their significance.

Sanford v. Castleton Health Care Center, LLC

813 N.E.2d 411 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 13, 2004

Rather, an arbitration agreement merely establishes a forum for future disputes; both parties are bound to it and both parties receive whatever benefits and detriments accompany the arbitral forum. … Because the allegations asserted in Count I of the amended complaint would not have been justiciable, absent review of an arbitral award, during Bagley's lifetime, they clearly did not become justiciable upon her death.

Rene Ex Rel. Rene v. Reed

726 N.E.2d 808 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 2000

An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s “ ‘decision rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.’ ” Hefty v. … To have standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute, a party must establish that his or her rights were adversely affected by operation of both the statute and the particular section he is attacking.

Lisiate Tavake v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 2019

To the contrary, it is clear that Officer Mills qualified as an assisting witness under Evidence Rule 615(b). … Officer Mills clearly qualified as an assisting witness that would have been excluded from such an order, but the State simply forgot to officially designate him as such.

Fulton County Commissioners v. Miller

788 N.E.2d 1284 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 30, 2003

Reversal of the trial court's ruling is warranted only when the court has abused its discretion, and its action is clearly erroneous and against the facts and cireumstances before it. Id. … Thus, the County is correct that the Manual does not establish the standard of care in this case.

Berman v. Cannon

878 N.E.2d 836 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 26, 2007

Berman’s absence from the trial does not qualify under any of the three exceptions in Rule 606(b). Consequently, the juror’s statement is not evidence that we may consider. See, e.g., Evans v. … “We cannot invade the province of the jury to decide the facts and cannot reverse unless the verdict is clearly erroneous.” Id.

Indiana State Board of Health Facility Administrators v. Werner

841 N.E.2d 1196 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 2006

The State failed to prove that Respondent undertook professional activities she was not qualified to undertake. See IC 25-1-9-4(4)(A)(1). 4. … Here, because a variety of sanctions are available, the record does not clearly require the imposition of a specific sanction against Werner. See Lamb, 256 Ind. at 70 , 267 N.E.2d at 165 .

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: N.Q., Je.Q., Ja.Q., L.Q., Minor Children, T.Q., Mother, and A.Q., Father v. Indiana Department of Child Services

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 8, 2013

[Parents] have failed to qualify for social security on several attempts, but they are hopeful with their new social security attorney. Id. at 74. … The Court in Matter of Robinson noted in that: It was clearly established at that hearing that the children were wards of the Welfare Department in foster home care, that they were to remain so, and

In Re The Guardianship of Samantha R. Barton, Harriet Barton v. James P. Barton (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 6, 2015

The evidence clearly established that she is troubled by the conflict between her mom and dad. Based upon that evidence, her attendance was not in her best interests.” Appellant’s App. at 8. … Reviewing the above credentials, we are satisfied that Gottschalk was suitably qualified.

Tazian v. Cline

673 N.E.2d 485 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 1996

The law established in precedent is that, "[t]he primary rule in interpreting a deed is that it is to be taken as a whole, with the grantor's intention controlling. … Legler, 245 Ind. 655 , 199 N.E.2d 346 (1964). [4] Because we find the language of the deed to clearly convey a fee simple estate, we decline to consider the public policy issues raised by the Tazians.

Allen v. Proksch

832 N.E.2d 1080 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 17, 2005

Since that time, Father has tried to establish a relationship with [C.A.] but [C.A.] has resisted. 6. … Casserly to be well qualified and his testimony very helpful. 64. Dr.

Aviation Consultants, Inc. v. Timken Alcor Aerospace Technologies, Honaker Aviation, Inc. and Jet Access Aviation, LLC (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 2017

The plain language of this clause clearly indicates that it applies solely to the “released claims” covered by the Settlement Agreement. … [14] As a general rule, Arizona disfavors contractual provisions by which one party seeks to immunize itself against the consequences of its own torts. Salt River Project Agric.

St. Mary's Medical Center, of Evansville, Inc. v. Warrick County Ex Rel. Board of Commissioners

671 N.E.2d 929 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 28, 1996

DISCUSSION AND DECISION Indiana Code § 86-22-24 provides that the county executive "shall establish and maintain ... a county jail...." … Indiana Code § 12-16-3-1 delineates the medical criteria an individual must satisfy to qualify for HCI benefits.

Indiana State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Stanadyne, Inc.

435 N.E.2d 278 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 24, 1982

The shipping of goods to a distribution center at which no retailing is conducted clearly evidences an intent to transship such goods to another destination. … It has long been established that an exemption unclaimed is forever lost.

Hathcoat v. Town of Pendleton Election Board

622 N.E.2d 1352 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 1993

A recurrent question before reviewing courts is whether a particular voting mark establishes a valid vote. For example, in Lorch v. … Clearly, a write-in vote must include both a voting mark as well as the write-in candidate’s name. I.C. 3-11-11-7(b).

Babes Showclub v. Lair

901 N.E.2d 44 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 13, 2009

We decline to take the inconsistent position that public policy favors holding that the defendants have complete immunity based solely upon the plaintiff's occupation. … Clearly, these laws were enacted to protect the public in general, rather than police officers in particular. The Lairs cite Ray v.

Lutheran Hospital of Fort Wayne, Inc. v. Department of Public Welfare

72 Ind. Dec. 715 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 6, 1979

This evidence was sufficient to establish that Hospitals were not conducted for profit. Wayne Twp. v. … By contrast, the evidence here clearly showed the “non-profit” status of appellant Hospitals.