Case law

Roy Hudnall v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 17, 2020

An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic, facts, and circumstances presented. Id. … Authentication of an exhibit can be established by either direct or circumstantial evidence.” Id.

Higgason v. Indiana Department of Correction

864 N.E.2d 1137 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 27, 2007

An abuse of discretion occurs “where the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances.” Smith v. State, 754 N.E.2d 502, 504 (Ind.2001). … Indiana Evidence Rule 702 provides: (a) If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by

DeKalb County Airport Authority v. DeKalb County Board of Zoning Appeals, Speedway Sand & Gravel, Inc., Jeffrey Bauman, Custer Farms, Inc., and Ed Schneider (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 12, 2018

and concluded that the Board’s decision: is not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; is not contrary to a constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … appeal is that it has standing because it has suffered a “special injury.”8 7 The Airport maintains that, as the owner and operator of a public use airport, [the Airport] clearly

Skolnick v. State

72 Ind. Dec. 199 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 1979

Pi-varnik intends to further falsely imprison Skolnick, all to be done by Pivarnik under the sham and pretense of legal proceeding, without authority or jurisdiction, and in violation of Skolnick’s rights, privileges, and immunities … Nevertheless the record before us in the instant case clearly portrays the nature of the conduct for which Skolnick was convicted. That conduct is, on its face, directly contumacious..

Rising Property Management, LLP v. Department of Metropolitan Development Board of Zoning Appeals and Glendale Partners, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 2012

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not FILED be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing … 5-14, a court may provide relief from agency action only if it is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity

Rosalio Pedraza v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 23, 2012

But the possibility that a jury might decline to find Pedraza to be a habitual substance offender notwithstanding his qualifying prior convictions does not establish that the jury waiver issue was clearly stronger than … Pedraza has simply not met this burden with respect to establishing that the unraised jury waiver issue was clearly stronger than the other issues raised on appeal.

Jerry Alderman Ford Sales, Inc. v. Bailey

154 Ind. App. 632 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 27, 1972

Such allegation is clearly one of a state of mind, and is sufficient in its generality. … The purchase price of the vehicle was established as $24,350.00.

Wireman v. State

418 N.E.2d 1182 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 1981

It was uncontradicted these names were selected by the jury commissioners, acting individually, from (among other sources) voter registration records which clearly indicated the political affiliations of the prospective jurors … Thus, it was established the potential grand jury members were selected from a jury box which had not been purged for a substantial number of years of names selected from politically-labeled voter lists.

In the Matter of the Guardianship of A.P., Adult, Louisa Jurich v. Louis Picicco (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 2016

[14] It is well established that a writing panel may reconsider a ruling by the motions panel. Simon v. Simon, 957 N.E.2d 980, 987 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). … Jurich has not demonstrated that the trial court’s order is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances presented or contrary to law.

Donald L. Deputy v. Connie S. Deputy

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 17, 2013

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case … claim that the trial court should have somehow given him credit toward Daniel’s educational expenses for the earned income tax credit Mother received. 8 any for which they qualified

Joshua P. Lindsey v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 14, 2012

Under the “actual evidence” test, a defendant must demonstrate a reasonable possibility that the evidentiary facts used by the fact-finder to establish the essential elements of one offense may also have been used to establish … The instructions as a whole left the jury to decide on its own whether the BB gun qualified under the circumstances of the case as a deadly weapon.

Essroc Cement Corp. v. Clark County Board of Zoning Appeals and Sierra Club

122 N.E.3d 881 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 2019

[24] On appeal, Essroc first notes “Indiana recognizes the doctrine of accessory use, under which the right to establish and maintain a commercial or nonresidential use normally includes the right to … Essroc has not explained whether or how burning LWDF to produce cement would qualify as an accessory use under the CCZO’s definition. As such, this argument is waived. See Kentucky Nat. Ins.

State of Indiana ex rel. Curtis T. Hill, Attorney General of Indiana v. William J. Pfister, Richard A. Sopko, Travelers Insurance Companies, Western Surety Insurance Company (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 24, 2019

in existence and argued that Pfister and Sopko’s document requests would require the State to “spend hundreds of exhaustive hours compiling and preparing work papers for prior SBOA audit reports clearly … liable for the policy amounts of Policy Nos. 1 and 2 and Policy No. 2 Renewal to cover allegations regarding Pfister if it were to prevail in its claims against him, and argues that the policies qualified

Jason Lee Sowers v. State of Indiana

988 N.E.2d 360 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 16, 2013

Because this is a factual determination, it is subject to a clearly erroneous standard of review. Id. … Again, the Indiana Supreme Court has emphasized that the fundamental error rule is extremely narrow and, in order to qualify as fundamental error, “the error must be so prejudicial to the rights of the defendant as to make

Brown v. Schaffer

145 Ind. App. 591 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 5, 1969

, omitting caption and signature, is as follows: *596 “Preston Schaffer as Executor of the Last Will and Testament of Guy Brown, deceased, respectfully petitions the court as follows: “(1) That he is the duly appointed, qualified … It was an established principle of law under the Justinian Code of Rome, and early became a part of the common law of England.

Jackson v. Russell

498 N.E.2d 22 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 1986

Russell argues there were essential ly two contracts established between himself and PPG. … He then essentially argues that all the elements of fraud must be established in order to prove deception.

Amy R. Hockett v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 2014

“It is well established that ‘[t]he element of intent may be proven by circumstantial evidence alone, and it is well established that knowledge and intent may be inferred from the facts and circumstances of each case.’” … Hockett claimed that doctors suspected that K.H. had and that he was being tested for, acid reflux, lactose intolerance, food allergies, leukemia, an immune disorder, a blood disorder, and kidney stones.

Board of Commissioners v. Board of Commissioners

27 Ind. App. 378 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 9, 1901

If the right is doubtful, it must first be established by an ordinary action at law, where the right is such as admits of its establishment in that way. … S. 1881) continued in use, and the provision therefor was not amended until 1891 (Acts 1891, p. 376, §534 Bxirns 1894), when a mode of selection by the jury commissioners of qualified persons, preparatory to the striking

Board of Commissioners v. Great Lakes Transfer, LLC

888 N.E.2d 784 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 12, 2008

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 … The Indiana Supreme Court recently clarified that factual findings linked to a ruling on a motion to transfer venue are reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard and rulings of law are reviewed de novo.

Taliyah Brooks v. USA Track & Field, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 30, 2024

App. 2016) (“We are reluctant to overrule orders issued by the motions panel unless we have determined that there is clear authority establishing that the motions panel erred.”); In re Adoption of O.R., 16 N.E.3d 965 … I am not persuaded by the majority’s attempt to qualify this statement as dependent upon the case proceeding to judgment following trial, as opposed to the entry of summary judgment, as occurred here