Case law

Edward Blackburn v. State of Indiana

130 N.E.3d 1207 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 2019

court denied the motion, citing lack of authority to compel the State to give Hadden immunity. … Upon motion, a trial may be continued at the court’s discretion and shall be continued upon a showing of good cause established by affidavit. Ind. Trial Rule 53.5.

Doan v. Herod

56 Ind. App. 663 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 1914

Any other rule would be clearly unjust and equally harsh, for it would cast the financial burden of a contest upon those who win it. … Under such a system an heir or distributee might establish his right to the estate only to realize that it had been heavily charged or entirely absorbed by the putative executor’s fruitless attempt to establish a will.

In Re The Marriage of: Cheryl Ann Hester v. Michael D. Hester, Jr.(mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 16, 2016

[4] The October 5, 2012 QDRO was sent to the Con-Way retirement plan administrator, and senior retirement plan administrator Jack Cosgrove determined that it did not qualify as a qualified domestic relations … Cosgrove sent a letter dated January 18, 2014, to Wife’s counsel stating that the submitted QDRO related to Husband’s pension plan benefit would qualify as a qualified domestic relations order,1 and on January

Mathis v. Cooperative Vendors, Inc.

170 Ind. App. 659 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 1976

assertion of those rights, privileges or immunities. … Cigarettes clearly fall within the category of “tangible personal property” defined in 6-2-l-l(k), supra.

State v. Daley

165 Ind. App. 513 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 27, 1975

The State contends that the Act, and specifically the above provision, was a legislative response to the abolition of sovereign immunity. … The established rule in this State is that “Statutes are to be construed as having a prospective operation unless the language clearly indicates that they were intended to be retrospective. (Citations omitted.)

Severson v. Board of Trustees of Purdue University

777 N.E.2d 1181 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 7, 2002

The Supreme Court relied on a presumption that a “Compact Clause agency does not qualify for Eleventh Amendment immunity ‘[ujnless there is good reason to believe that the States structured the new agency to enable it to … The police officers and agencies involved in investigating Eskew’s cocaine possession were immune from any liability through ITCA law-enforcement immunity.

City of Hobart v. Town of Merrillville

74 Ind. Dec. 602 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 1980

Thus the legislature clearly expressed an intent for the consent requirements of § 31 to be applied to all town annexations. … I § 23 (privileges and immunities) and art. IV § 23 (special laws) of the Indiana Constitution.

Indiana Department of State Revenue v. Estate of Wallace

77 Ind. Dec. 384 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 28, 1980

The Department argues that the bequest does not qualify for an exemption under I.R.C. § 2055(a)(2) or (3) for the reason that judicial and administrative interpretations of § 2055(a) have established that the term “charitable … When a statute is amended by the addition of a provision, “[a] presumption is raised that the Legislature intended to change the law unless it clearly appears an amendment was made only to express more clearly the original

In Re the Marriage of Jones

180 Ind. App. 496 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 14, 1979

The reason is that the law of the case for reasons of policy must be accorded finality and hence immunity from perpetual collateral attacks. See Sheraton Corporation of America, supra. … An abuse of discretion is an erroneous conclusion and judgment, one clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court or the reasonable, probable and actual deductions to be drawn therefrom

Walker v. Rinck

566 N.E.2d 1088 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 1991

a form of relief to one who has suffered, it is well established that the law cannot provide a remedy for every injury incurred.” … An injection of RhoGAM, 1 Rh immune globulin, prevents the formation of the aggluti-nins in Rh-negative women who have received Rh-positive blood.

Sloan v. Metropolitan Health Council of Indianapolis, Inc.

516 N.E.2d 1104 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 1987

Metro is a federally qualified health maintenance organization under Title XIII of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300e. … If under these allegations the plaintiff can establish negligence on the part of regular employees in the performance of their regular duties under the supervision and control of the center, liability may be established.

Jackson v. Trancik

953 N.E.2d 1087 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 20, 2011

We will reverse only if the trial court’s decision is “clearly erroneous and against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court.” Indianapolis *1091 Podiatry, P.C. v. … To establish an expert’s qualifications, only one characteristic — knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education — is required, so an affiant may qualify as an expert based on practical experience alone.

Parkview Hospital, Inc. v. John J. Wernert, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, and The Methodist Hospitals, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 14, 2015

Parkview asserts that it has established its right to relief under Section 229 and Indiana law as a matter of law, or, at the very least, has established disputed material issues of fact. … Methodist argues that, because Parkview’s original submission fell short of establishing it qualified for DSH payments, Parkview demands special treatment.

Hayes v. Trustees of Indiana University

902 N.E.2d 303 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2009

Thus, it clearly intended to exclude the actions of the University from judicial review. … :[T]he mandamus action does not lie to establish a right or to define and impose a duty.

City of Anderson v. Weatherford

714 N.E.2d 181 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 14, 1999

However, limits have been established which recognize that officers are not immune from liability for all actions that are somehow tied to effecting an arrest. … Specifically, our supreme court has established that subsection (7) of the Act only confers immunity for the breach of a public duty, and provides no refuge to governmental entities or employees when a private duty [1] to

Ledbetter v. Ball Memorial Hospital

724 N.E.2d 1113 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 29, 2000

We review only for an abuse of discretion and reverse only when the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id. … Specifically, they argue that the Act violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Indiana Constitution, article I, § 23.

County Department of Public Welfare of Lake County v. Morrow

158 Ind. App. 106 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 1973

—The county board of public welfare shall appoint a county director of public welfare who shall be appointed solely on the basis of merit from eligible lists established by the Indiana personnel board, and shall be a citizen … Kelley clearly has an interest relating to the subject of this action.

Fields v. Cummins Employees Federal Credit Union

540 N.E.2d 631 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 6, 1989

not automatically immune from suit. … The court held the facts establishing a common law *640 duty were the same as those which established a violation of the specific statutory © provisions and therefore the common law did not apply.

Town of Montezuma v. Downs

685 N.E.2d 108 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 9, 1997

Since Flowers , the common law defense of governmental immunity has been replaced by the ITCA. … The summary judgment standard clearly provides that after the movants show they are entitled to summary judgment, the burden shifts to the non-movant to establish a genuine issue of material fact.

Richards v. Richards

60 Ind. App. 34 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 3, 1915

section shall not apply * * * to conveyance * * * when made to husband and wife. * * * ” The law affecting a conveyance of real estate to husband and wife has been frequently construed by the Supreme Court and the rule is established … If the language clearly shows an intention to take and hold the title as tenants in common, then such intention must be given effect.