Case law

In the Matter of S.C., Kad.C., and Kai.C., Children in Need of Services, K.C., Mother, and J.C., Father v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 6, 2020

His job involves obtaining and implementing new weapons, and he is qualified to run a shooting range. Id. Mother is Filipino, and her side of the family lives in California. … “A judgment is clearly erroneous if it relies on an incorrect legal standard.” Id. at 1002.

MAPCO Coal Inc. v. Godwin

786 N.E.2d 769 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2003

If I qualify for long term disability payments, how will the amount of my monthly payment be determined? … I think that it implies to the jury that they can give a zero damage award and that's clearly inconsistent with the evidence in this case.

Weida v. Dowden

664 N.E.2d 742 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 1996

Words are to be given their plain, ordinary and usual meaning unless a contrary purpose is clearly shown by the statute itself. Department of Pub. Welfare v. Couch, 605 N.E.2d 165 (Ind.1992). … As drafted, SEA 443 would immunize from all liability a person who furnishes alcoholic beverages to those under the age of twenty one.

Izaak Walton League of America, Inc. v. Dekalb County Surveyor's Office

850 N.E.2d 957 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 2006

DNR appears to claim that two letters to DNR from private citizens qualify as "matters placed on the record after an ex parte communication" under subsection (b)(11) that Walton and Cedar Creek improperly failed to include … To the extent some language in Browns-burg might be read as establishing a strict rule that all documents created during the course of an administrative "proceeding" must be made part of the agency record for purposes of

In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.C., Minor Child, and his Father, M.C., M.C. v. Indiana Department of Child Services

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 3, 2014

On September 10, 2012, Father established paternity of Child. … At the time [Child] was detained at the beginning of the ChINS case he was behind on his immunizations and did not have a primary care doctor.

Muniz Etc. v. United States

129 Ind. App. 433 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 30, 1959

Mickle as receiver of Cabinet Craft Corporation was made permanent, and he qualified *439 as receiver. … We are of the opinion that it clearly falls within the latter description.

Home Insurance Co. of New York v. Boyd

19 Ind. App. 173 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 28, 1898

App. 361 , it is held that the averment that appellee performed all the conditions in the policy, on his part, was intended to apply to and qualify the conduct of the insured to the time of the'action and must be so construed … From these facts it clearly appears that the house covered by the policy of insurance sued upon, was within the meaning of *186 the language of the policy, and in law, “vacant, unoccupied and uninhabited,” at the time of

Ashley Poythress and LaVenita Burnett v. Esurance Insurance Company (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 9, 2018

A trial court abuses its discretion when its decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Id. … [8] As to paragraph 5, Appellants assert Patten provided “expert testimony” without sufficient foundation to be qualified as an expert.

Connersville Hydraulic Co. v. City of Connersville

95 Ind. App. 234 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 3, 1930

The railroad, in its return to the alternative writ, inter alia, alleged that in 1901 a good faith controversy had arisen concerning the legality of the proceedings relating to the laying out and establishing of the street … A. 656, the railroad claimed a grant of perpetual immunity, from its otherwise binding obligation to keep a bridge in repair, by virtue of a contract with the city wherein the city agreed to maintain the structure “for all

State of Indiana v. Samuel E. Vande Brake

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 3, 2020

Further, “[w]hen appealing from a negative judgment, a party has a heavy burden to establish to the satisfaction of the reviewing court that there was no basis in fact for the … There is no dispute that the State properly filed the enhancement or that Vande Brake’s conviction is a qualifying offense.

Indiana Department of Education v. Mt. Zions Loving Day Care Ministry

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 30, 2025

administrative decision only if it is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to a constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … [22] The plain language of the CACFP law also clearly allows, but does not require, an agency to accept additional corrective action up to the date of an appeal hearing. 7 C.F.R. § 226.6(c)(4)(i) provides

State of Indiana v. Samuel E. Vande Brake

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 3, 2020

Further, “[w]hen appealing from a negative judgment, a party has a heavy burden to establish to the satisfaction of the reviewing court that there was no basis in fact for the … There is no dispute that the State properly filed the enhancement or that Vande Brake’s conviction is a qualifying offense.

State Employees' Appeals Commission, Indiana State Personnel Board v. Brown

436 N.E.2d 321 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 9, 1982

court finds such finding, decision or determination of such agency is: (1) Arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law; or (2) Contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege or immunity … Moreover, the Indiana Supreme Court has clearly indicated that the ‘substantial evidence’ test encompassed by the statute is not a hybrid standard formulated specifically for review of Public Service Commission decisions,

Rogers v. National City Bank of Evansville

602 N.E.2d 1024 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 1992

The National City Bank of Evansville was appointed, qualified and acted as personal representative. On July 17, 1990, the Bank as personal representative, filed its inventory of probate assets. … A probate court abuses its discretion when its decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Matherly v. Matherly (1983), Ind., 457 N.E.2d 220, 221 .

Michael A. Ferrill v. Susan E. Ferrill

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 6, 2020

In exchange for leaving active duty before qualifying for pension, Michael was to receive Voluntary Separation Incentive (“VSI”) payments in an amount based on his pay grade when separating from the military … The Court will ask the parties to conduct the necessary calculations to establish the payments going forward that Michael will pay to Susan and submit an agreed order accordingly.

Rubin v. Johnson

550 N.E.2d 324 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 19, 1990

Without citing pertinent case law, Rubin also indicates that as an expert in the sale of firearms, Looney was not qualified to relay his conclusions concerning the mental soundness of Campbell to the trial court. … In order to be admissible expert opinions must be preceded by a foundation establishing the witness' credentials. Yang v. Stafford (1987), Ind.App., 515 N.E.2d 1157, 1161 , trans. denied.

Roy C. Bebout v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 2014

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any Sep 16 2014, 8:56 am court except for the purpose of establishing … As this court has explained, “[t]his rule clearly applies to motions to correct errors relating to matters on the direct appeal.

William Martez Wills v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 2018

A trial court abuses its discretion when its decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Id. … [27] A claim of prosecutorial misconduct requires us to make the following determinations: first, we determine whether the prosecutor’s conduct qualifies as misconduct, and second, whether any misconduct

Stevonta D. Hill v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 11, 2018

[7] On August 9, 2016, Hill testified before a grand jury under a grant of use immunity. … [20] Moreover, the State emphasizes the “proved beyond a reasonable doubt” language of section (e) of the statute while ignoring section (d), which clearly requires a hearing on an enhancement after “

Constantinos P. Angelopoulos v. Theodore P. Angelopoulos, Neptunia Incorporated, Transmar Corporation, Didiac Establishment, Beta Steel Corporation, and Top Gun Investment Corporation, II.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 2013

The Greek courts clearly rejected Constantinos’s claim on its merits. Pursuant to the doctrines of both comity and res judicata, Constantinos cannot now relitigate this issue in Indiana courts. … claims that the deposition materials should have remained confidential because the trial court had already approved of the agreed-to protective order, which he 19 claims would qualify