Case law

KTP Ex Rel. ASP v. Atchison

848 N.E.2d 280 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 24, 2006

s birth and subsequent hospitalization. [4] On October 9, 2003, the State filed a petition to establish paternity. … On November 1, 2004, in an order establishing paternity and child support, the court found that Atchison admitted paternity and established Atchison as the biological father of K.T.P.

Franklin v. Hunt

132 Ind. App. 575 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 1961

There appear no entries or proceedings of any kind to show or establish that any change of venue was ever taken by either party from the said judge, John *577 H. Brubaker, or that the said J. … Richard Kemper was ever in any manner selected or qualified as a special judge in said cause. Insofar as the record manifests, the said J.

General Collections, Inc. v. Ochoa

546 N.E.2d 113 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 15, 1989

General Collections contends on appeal that the evidence produced during the hearing on Ochoa’s motion to set aside default and motion to dismiss proceedings supplemental was so conclusive in establishing Ochoa’s identity … as the subject judgment debtor as to render the trial court’s determination to the contrary clearly erroneous.

Quincy D. Sullivan v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 2017

To constitute fundamental error, the error must be a clearly blatant violation of basic and elementary principles of due process and present an undeniable and substantial potential for harm such that a fair … State, 748 N.E.2d 381, 390 (Ind. 2001) (holding that defendant cannot exercise State’s right to grant use immunity); Eaton v.

Eley v. Benedict

113 Ind. App. 202 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 9, 1943

In applying the rule, the courts have used various qualifying terms, such as “reasonable evidence,” “competent evidence” and “legal evidence.” … If it be conceded (which I do not do) that Morgan was not the agent of the appellants, then under the facts clearly established by the record Morgan’s relation with appellants was that of contractor.

Hannan v. Pest Control Services, Inc.

734 N.E.2d 674 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 31, 2000

R. 702 requires that the expert be qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training or education.” … In Femco , it was established that the plaintiff had been exposed to the substance at issue. Id. at 791 .

Hunter v. State

172 Ind. App. 397 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 3, 1977

Hanna (1968), 143 Ind. 490 , 241 N.E.2d 376 which discusses interspousal immunity with approval. The Supreme Court abolished interspousal immunity in Brooks v. Robinson (1972), 259 Ind. 16 , 284 N.E.2d 794 . … This is clearly not a correct statement of the law. Indiana maintains a parent-child immunity in tort actions. Vaughan v. Vaughan (1974), 161 Ind. App. 497 , 316 N.E.2d 455 .

Williams v. Tharp

934 N.E.2d 1203 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 30, 2010

The supreme court determined that Williams and Kelsey had failed to establish a genuine factual dispute regarding whether Tharp knew that his *1206 statements were false and thus abused the qualified privilege. … The trial court did not err in finding a qualified privilege established as a matter of law, thereby precluding the plaintiffs' claim for defamation.

Charles Aillones v. Glen D. Minton

77 N.E.3d 196 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 30, 2017

An abuse of discretion occurs if the trial court’s decision is clearly erroneous and against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court or if its decision is without reason or is based … Code § 25-23-1-7(a)(9)(B) (providing that Board of Nursing shall establish, with the approval of the medical licensing board, the requirements that an advanced practice nurse must meet to be granted authority

A.J.R. v. State of Indiana

3 N.E.3d 1000 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 2014

An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id. … It is within the trial court’s discretion to determine whether a witness is qualified to give an opinion.

Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, Inc. v. Public Service Commission

425 N.E.2d 178 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 31, 1981

F.S.A.), establishes minimum requirements for the adjudication of any party’s legal rights, duties, privi *184 leges or immunities by state agencies. … To hold otherwise would be to combine the legislative and judicial functions in one body clearly contrary to the separation of powers doctrine.

Indiana & Michigan Electric Co. v. Public Service Commission

492 N.E.2d 323 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 7, 1986

Quite clearly, the Commission is empowered to act in distinct capacities. … The rules themselves operate upon electric utilities and upon qualifying facilities 4 as a class.

Thiellen v. Graves

530 N.E.2d 765 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 1988

Clearly, Thiellen’s injuries did “aris[e] out of and in the course of [his] employment.” 3 The phrase “in the course *767 of employment” refers to the time, place and circumstances under which the accident took place. … However, such a connection is established when the accident arises out of a risk which is a reasonably prudent person might comprehend as incidental to the work. Id.

Snover v. State

837 N.E.2d 1042 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2005

establishing that there is a factual basis for the information furnished; or (2) contain information that establishes that the totality of the cireumstances corroborates the hearsay. … To me, Hammond's statements to police qualified as statements against penal interest. Hammond admitted that the drugs were his and that he had just purchased them from Snover.

Shawn Senter v. Kosciusko County Board of Zoning Appeals

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 21, 2025

Clearly, the sale of gasoline does not constitute the “sale” or “repair” of a motorized vehicle. … By referring to “motorized vehicle sales, service, & repair,” the zoning ordinance clearly refers to businesses such as car dealerships, automotive repair shops, oil-changing garages, and similar establishments—and

Adelina Monique Bray v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 17, 2020

The trial court found Bray not guilty of the Class A misdemeanor offense due to the State’s failure to establish the endangerment element of the offense. … An abuse of discretion has occurred when the sentencing decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court, or the reasonable, probable, and actual deductions to

William M. Belcher v. Catherine Kroczek, D.D.S.

13 N.E.3d 448 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 9, 2014

Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when the record lacks any evidence or reasonable inferences to support them. Coffman v. Olson & Co., P.C., 872 N.E.2d 145, 147 (Ind. Ct. … We therefore conclude that they are not chattels.3 Goodwill, however, may qualify as chattel. There are two types of goodwill: enterprise goodwill and professional goodwill.

Cynthia Liggins v. Ralph Smith and Tammeka Smith and Attorney General of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 2015

She asserts that this disparate treatment violates the privileges and immunities clause of Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution. … “Instead, we apply a less stringent standard of review and may reverse if the appellant establishes prima facie error.

Wyzard v. Wyzard

771 N.E.2d 754 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 2002

Testimony at the hearing established that should Husband die before retiring, his estate would only receive the $32,409.58 he contributed to the Fund; however, if Husband was married, his wife would receive 60% of his benefits … (e) [ ] Husband's benefits are exempt from attachment, garnishment, judicial process such as a Qualified Domestic Relations Order and he may not transfer, assign or sell his benefits. (£) There is no pre-retirement survivor

Indiana Department of State Revenue v. Convenient Industries of America, Inc.

157 Ind. App. 179 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 31, 1973

All of the corporations in Holland were qualified to do business in Indiana. One such corporaton established sales offices within the state and maintained a staff of employees who solicited sales within Indiana. … It was, we think, clearly a single contract, whereby Fort Pitt committed and obligated itself for the entire result.” 227 Ind. 538, 544 .