Case law

Rex E. Breeden Revocable Trust v. Hoffmeisterrepp

941 N.E.2d 1045 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 6, 2010

After inspecting the house, Hendershot graded the roof as "poor/defective," and recommended that a qualified contractor further evaluate and repair as needed. … Also, Breeden himself fails to establish that Hoffmeister-Repp knew the ducts were rotten at the time of sale.

Comfax Corp. v. North American Van Lines, Inc.

638 N.E.2d 476 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 1994

NAVL later established a wholly-owned subsidiary called Relocation Management Systems ("RMS"), which marketed a software package. … Comfax and Kuker contend that as a qualified attorney, Lundy's legal opinion as to an ultimate issue in the case is admissible. See Willsey v.

Harbour Town Associates, Ltd. v. City of Noblesville

540 N.E.2d 1283 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 20, 1989

Therefore, it was not an accessory use of the property, and similarly did not qualify as an allowable use. The decision of this court in Mazey v. … It was solely the character of the main use of the property as school or public which qualified the accessory use as a permitted use.

Stults v. State

166 Ind. App. 461 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 6, 1975

Such a state of facts can as well be established by one source of testimony as another. … is taken into custody for any other reason he or she becomes immune to prosecution under the disorderly conduct statute no matter what behavior ensues.

Reynaldo Amaro-Perez v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 19, 2019

years, with the first two years to be executed in the Cass County Jail and the third year suspended to probation, with the possibility for the second executed year to be served on community corrections if he qualified … An allegation that the trial court failed to identify or find a mitigating factor requires the defendant to establish that the mitigating evidence is both significant and clearly supported by the record

KD EX REL. KD v. Chambers

951 N.E.2d 855 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 13, 2011

McCoy, Ph.D., on the grounds that he was not properly qualified as an expert. … We will reverse only if the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the trial court. Id. II.

Community Hospitals of Indiana, Inc. v. Aspen Insurance UK Limited and Hiscox, LTD

113 N.E.3d 636 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 19, 2018

Again, the Insurance Companies indicated the relevant Community employees qualified as health care providers under the IMMA. … In its answer, Community certified it was a qualified health care provider “entitled to all rights, privileges, limitations, liability caps, defenses and immunities provided for [by the IMMA].”

Chamberlain v. Parks

692 N.E.2d 1380 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 1998

In considering a constitutional challenge to a statute, we presume that the statute is valid, and place the burden upon the party challenging it to clearly overcome the presumption by a contrary showing. Boehm v. … We therefore conclude that the Wrongful Death Act does not violate the Indiana Privileges and Immunities Clause under Article I, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution. III.

Guardianship: Indiana Family & Social Services Administration v. Cheryl Adducci

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 2024

Moreover, FSSA’s ability to protect this interest is clearly impeded by this proceeding. … The Adduccis have failed to establish that the Support Order may be justified by the doctrine of necessaries.

Ridenour v. Furness

504 N.E.2d 336 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 26, 1987

Such findings may not be set aside unless they are clearly erroneous.” College Life, at 742. … Since the commercial fishermen and restaurant had no legally recognizable harm and since they did not establish a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits by demonstrating a prima facie case, the trial court clearly

Jeff Lane v. Menard, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 2024

The Defendants argued that they were statutorily immune from suit because they had probable cause to detain Lane. … The Act clearly and unambiguously applies when the merchant or its agent has probable cause to believe that a theft “is occurring,” referring to something that is presently occurring, or “has occurred,” referring to something

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.T., Jr., A Minor Child v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 30, 2017

That the parent-child relationships between [A.T.], the child, and father, [A.T., Sr.], be terminated and all rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations, including … Moreover, DCS is not required to rule out all possibilities of change; rather, it need establish only that there is a reasonable probability the parent’s behavior will not change. Id.

Brinegar v. Robertson Corp.

550 N.E.2d 812 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 28, 1990

Tyree, as fire chief of Bedford and associated with the Bedford Fire Department for thirty-six (86) years, is clearly qualified as an expert witness. … He would also qualify as an expert witness based on his personal knowledge of the Robertson property.

Kennedy v. State

934 N.E.2d 779 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 6, 2010

Here, Kennedy conceded that Keeling possesses the requisite skill, training, and experience to qualify as an expert in the field of DNA forensic analysis. … Chakraborty also agreed that trained and qualified DNA analysts ean have reasonable disagreements regarding proper test results.

Bowen v. Review Board of Indiana Employment Security Division

173 Ind. App. 166 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 25, 1977

. *168 DECISION CONCLUSION — Bowen qualified for benefits under the terms of the Statute. … This was clearly a conscious extra benefit conveyed by the Legislature. Federal legislation does not go so far. See IC 1971, 22-4-15-2 and 3 (e) ; 26 U.S.C. § 3304 .

Anderson v. REVIEW BD. OF IND. EMP. SEC.

412 N.E.2d 819 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 25, 1980

This section of the regulations is clearly labeled, "Disqualifications." It does not attempt to set forth the criteria of eligibility nor the factors which must be considered to determine eligibility. … to whom it is applicable if they meet the qualifying requirements outlined in the next section.

Maxey v. Board of Zoning Appeals

480 N.E.2d 589 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 24, 1985

It is to be distinguished from commercial uses of land, and the Valparaiso ordinance clearly makes that distinction in the R-1 classification. … None of the prerequisites has been unequivocally established as a matter of law. III.

Aikens v. Indiana Department of Child Services

903 N.E.2d 146 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 2009

The trial court's judgment will be set aside only if it is clearly erroneous. Id. … The DCS has established a reasonable probability that Mother will not change regarding L.A.

Indiana Bell Telephone Co. v. Friedland

175 Ind. App. 622 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 9, 1978

As an administrative agency, it is presumed to be qualified by knowledge and experience to perform this function. … (Emphasis supplied) 290 A.2d at 701-702 . * * * “The Public Utility Code clearly prohibits discrimination in rates and services for whatever reason' and just as clearly empowers the PUC to hear and decide such complaints.

State Farm Fire & Casualty Company v. White

168 Ind. App. 118 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 1976

It is widely recognized that the public represents an anonymous third party to the insurance contract, having a clearly definable interest in its interpretation.” 262 F.Supp. 1, 5 . … Since the purported qualifying phrase relies upon “permission” for its meaning, and since permission may be implied, the inquiry for the trier of fact remains the same. The judgment is affirmed.