Case law

Sheila Gonzalez and Rod Gonzalez v. Sara Ritz, Northern Indiana Public Service Company, Porter County Drug Task Force, and Town of Chesterton

102 N.E.3d 910 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 21, 2018

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 64A04-1712-CT-2850 | May 21, 2018 Page 11 of 12  Sheila’s testimony may qualify for admissibility. … At the very least, Appellees have failed to establish that it would certainly not be admissible at a trial.

Clark v. Review Board of the Department of Employment & Training Services

534 N.E.2d 260 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 1989

Clark indicated he discussed the problem with his wife and minister and decided to wait until the end of his probationary period which he indicated was only a short time, in order to qualify for a transfer and to establish … One can, of course, imagine an asserted claim so bizarre, so clearly nonreligious in motivation, as not to be entitled to protection under the Free Exercise Clause; but that is not the case here, and the guarantee of free

John W. Thomas v. State of Indiana

61 N.E.3d 1198 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2016

as a means of establishing specific intent for crimes such as attempted murder.” … Appellant’s Br. at 10; see also Reply Br. at 4 (“Clearly Thomas [] established that he was intoxicated; otherwise, the trial court would not have found it necessary to instruct the jury that it could not consider

Jarrett v. State

804 N.E.2d 807 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 3, 2004

It establishes conditions for sentencing and commitment to the Department of Correction. I.C. 85-38-1. … Clearly, Denise qualified as an individual who was due protection under the CPOA. That a proper petition was not filed in this case as required by the CPOA is concerning.

Graham v. State

736 N.E.2d 822 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 2000

Clearly, Graham failed to comply with the procedural mandate of Evid. R. 412(b). … Clearly, whether D.G. was a rebellious child has no bearing on whether she was raped by Graham. The trial court properly sustained the objection. We find no abuse of discretion.

Kirkpatrick v. City of Greensburg

113 Ind. App. 402 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 1943

Butler were the duly appointed, qualified and acting members of the board of trustees of the Greensburg Municipal Water Works, and, as such trustees, have had control and management of the water works system since the 23rd … It clearly intended to do so, and the city was free to follow the method provided by either act.” Hamilton v. Public Service Commission, supra.

Burd Management, LLC v. State

805 N.E.2d 1274 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 12, 2004

The eminent domain act and its case law clearly mandate that the State is required to make a good faith effort to *1278 purchase as a condition precedent to filing a condemnation action. … if raised, of whether a good faith offer was *1280 made may customarily be disposed of by the State by a request for summary judgment accompanied by an affidavit representing that the offer was based on an appraisal by a qualified

Indiana Department of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division v. Estate of Goodrich

439 N.E.2d 1155 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 1982

Goodrich died on October 25, 1973, leaving the majority of his vast estate to three existing private foundations he had previously established—Liberty Fund, Inc., (established 1960); Thirty-Five Twenty, Inc., (established … 1965); and The Winchester Foundation (established 1945).

Callaway v. Mellett

15 Ind. App. 366 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 26, 1896

A mere receipt may be explained, controlled, qualified or even contradicted by parol evidence. Pauley v. Weisart, 59 Ind. 241 ; Beedle v. State, ex rel., 62 Ind. 26 ; Lash v. Rendell, 72 Ind. 475 ; Landers v. … This custom is established, and all seeking transportation are bound to take notice of it. Of course, the contracts of carriage may be general or special.

Sunman-Dearborn Community School Corp. v. Kral-Zepf-Freitag & Associates

167 Ind. App. 339 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 1975

The contract here in question clearly designates as a party the North Dearborn Elementary School Building Corporation, as opposed to the respective school townships. … Further, two of the three township trustees executing the contract qualified their signatures indicating their capacities as officers of the building corporation. *344 Krai, however, insists that the trustees signed not as

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of N.Y. (Minor Child) C.Y. (Father) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 2018

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED: All rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations, including any rights to custody, parenting time, or … Best Interests [19] Father also asserts that the trial court clearly erred when it concluded that the termination of his parental rights is in Child’s best interests.

In the Matter of the Termination of Parental Rights of: Z.C. (Minor Child), and A.C. (Mother) & R.M. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 2020

Additionally, [Child] Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-JT-1778 | February 5, 2020 Page 2 of 19  was behind on immunizations. … In light of the applicable clear and convincing evidence standard, we review to determine whether the evidence clearly and convincingly supports the findings and whether the findings clearly and convincingly

Bragdon v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

109 Ind. App. 278 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 27, 1941

Appellant was appointed administratrix of the estate of Fannie Titus on May 9, 1939, and duly *282 qualified on such date. … provision to the contrary, an administrator or executor is entitled to the possession of all the decedent’s personal property for the purpose of settlement of the estate, the agreement between the insurer and the insured herein clearly

David Moss v. Indianapolis Department of Natural Resources (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 9, 2015

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Jul 09 2015, 9:39 am Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata … The trial court held that the NRC violated Indiana Code Section 4- 21.5-3-27 by not clearly identifying the “just cause” standard of review in the final order.

Jordon P. Stroud v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2016

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Oct 31 2016, 8:26 am court except for the purpose of establishing … This was clearly articulated by the trial court, and we are not confused.

James K. Melton, Perdue Foods, LLC f/k/a Perdue Farms Incorporated and FPP Business Services, Inc. v. Chad Stephens, Guardian of the Person and Estate of Stacy S. Stephens and Chad Stephens

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 22, 2014

A judgment is clearly erroneous when the findings of fact and conclusions thereon do not support it. Id. … Relying on the Illinois precedent established in Murphy v. Mancari’s Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., 948 N.E.2d 233 (Ill. Ct.

Town of Merrillville v. Merrillville Conservancy District Ex Rel. Board of Directors

649 N.E.2d 645 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 13, 1995

However, there is an exception to this presumption: the presumption will not apply if it appears that the amendment was made only to express the original intention of the legislature more clearly. Pike County v. … While chapter 23 provides general authority for municipalities to control sewage works, chapter 25 provides for sanitation departments and districts, with specific and different powers, for certain qualifying cities. 6 .

Nicholaus Griesemer and Alexander Griesemer, Minor Children, By Next Friend, Pamela Griesemer v. Brian Griesemer (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2016

Borrow against, cancel, transfer, remove, withdraw, or dispose of any funds for any purpose other than qualified higher education expenses, except as otherwise provided herein … 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. Id.

Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Armstrong

66 Ind. Dec. 583 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 8, 1979

Clearly, the jury rejected the testimony of Travelers’ claims adjuster. This Court will not disturb that decision. … Furthermore, the evidence, as characterized by Travelers, clearly establishes that this case in its entirety is nothing less than a good faith dispute.

Indianapolis Podiatry, P.C. v. Efroymson

720 N.E.2d 376 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 29, 1999

The trial court’s determination that the portions of the Karlson and Knauer affidavits at issue contained inadmissible legal conclusions and opinions as to Indiana law was not clearly erroneous. … Both Ice Miller and Podiatry address on appeal the question whether Karlson and Knauer were properly qualified as experts.