Case law

Williams v. Fort Wayne City of

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 23, 2024

immunity with Defendants’ brief to be filed by August 26, 2024. … No briefs have been filed and thus Defendants have waived their arguments on the issue of qualified immunity.

Deida v. Warden

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 28, 2024

To establish liability, a prisoner must satisfy both an objective and subjective component by showing: (1) his medical need was objectively serious; and (2) 1 Deida’s earlier complaint listed Dr. … Deida has not identified any document that qualifies as legal mail. See Kaufman v.

Burkes

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 12, 2026

Fisher, 364 F.3d 970, 973 (8th Cir. 2004) (“It is well established . . . that when officers are presented with serious danger in the course of carrying out an investigative detention, they may brandish weapons . . . in … App. 2024). 4 Because the court concludes Officer Sands and Officer Sweeney did not use excessive force against Burkes, it does not reach their alternative argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Doe v. Purdue University

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 19, 2020

As discussed by the Court of Appeals, this language clearly covered sexual misconduct complaints generally and revealed that Plaintiff impermissibly sought to champion the rights of other men. … Plaintiff counters that Defendants fail to recognize the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity. (Pl.’s Mem. Opp’n 10-11, ECF No. 63).

Rodriguez v. Parks

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 26, 2025

“Absent an entrustment of at least some of this authority, an employee does not qualify as a supervisor for purposes [of] imputing liability to the employer.” … While Parks clearly provided input into plaintiffs’ evaluations, was charged with training them, and managed aspects of their work assignments, Parks was not empowered to affect plaintiffs through tangible employment actions

Orr v. Sevier

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 13, 2021

Lastly, the State Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because Orr “fails to state how State Defendants were directly or otherwise involved” in forcing him to be handcuffed behind his back. … The State Defendants’ qualified immunity argument fails because it is premised upon their assertion they were not involved in handcuffing Orr behind his back, which is a disputed fact. See Mordi v.

Milner v. Dolgencorp, LLC

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 29, 2023

Infax, Inc., 72 F.3d 489, 493-94 (5th Cir. 1996) (holding that defense counsel’s “subjective knowledge” obtained in a telephone call with plaintiff’s counsel did not qualify as an “other paper,” even when the defense attorney … Defendant must either allege receipt of an “other [written] paper” clearly revealing the amount in controversy, or else present a persuasive argument with supporting case citations that a writing is not required.

Smith v. Kittle Property Group, INC.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 27, 2025

The employee handbook states clearly that the company “does not allow behavior at any time that threatens, intimidates, bullies, or coerces another employee, a resident, or a member of the public” [48-12 at KPG000213]. … Title VII prohibits a qualifying employer from “discharg[ing] any individual . . . because of such individual’s race [or] . . . sex.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1).

Steeno v. Wabash National Trailer Centers

822 F. Supp. 2d 855 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2011

Darchak, 580 F.3d at 631 (noting examples of circumstantial evidence, including: suspicious timing, ambiguous oral or written statements, statistical evidence of disparate treatment, and passing over otherwise qualified candidates … The Court recognizes this precedent, and that there are clearly cases where the job duties absorbed by employees outside the protected class are too meager to support a prima facie case under the mini-RIF analysis.

Forest River, Inc. v. Heartland Recreational Vehicles, LLC

753 F. Supp. 2d 753 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 10, 2010

The Purpose and Character of the Use An advertisement for the sale of a product clearly has a commercial purpose. … The Court does not agree that the Defendant’s use was so clearly transformative.

Spann-El v. Miami Correctional Facility

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 15, 2022

In plain terms, only “genuine emergencies” qualify as a basis for circumventing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Lewis v. Sullivan, 279 F.3d 526, 531 (7th Cir. 2002). … Here, Spann-El raises one valid claim of imminent danger, two conclusory claims of imminent danger, and several claims of imminent danger clearly without merit.

Daugherty v. Wabash Center, Inc.

572 F. Supp. 2d 1003 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 18, 2008

After the period of qualified leave expires and the employee returns to work, the employee is entitled to be reinstated to his or her former position or to an equivalent position with the same benefits and terms of employment … The unrebutted evidence clearly establishes that Mr. Daugherty would have been terminated even if Defendants had no retaliatory motive, due to Mr.

Deborah Washington v. Dana Light Axle Products, LLC

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 23, 2026

. ¶¶ 11–12). 4 Layson’s declaration discusses Dana’s Collective Bargaining Agreement, which clearly outlines situations like the one discussed above when Dana removes or adds “manpower,” or workers, and what happens … Dana produced evidence that it shut down the second shift of Department 110 due to decreased production, which qualifies as a legitimate, nondiscriminatory and nonretaliatory reason.

Fitzpatrick v. City of Fort Wayne

259 F.R.D. 357 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 2, 2009

In addition, this testimony is clearly relevant on the issue of probable cause, as these witnesses were present during Officer Lemon’s investigation of the incident and therefore have personal knowledge of it. … Because Daniel’s testimony about Donald’s statements failed to qualify as an admission, Katter’s remarks likewise fail.

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 28, 2022

The ALJ clearly stated that the record would not be held open and then promised to address Dr. Larson’s treating source statement in his decision. Indeed, the ALJ did exactly that; the ALJ addressed Dr. … J has failed to establish that the ALJ had a legal obligation to admit Dr. Larson’s opinion based on an oral promise during the administrative hearing. However, Ms.

Ragsdale v. Beacon Health Systems Inc

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 13, 2020

Ragsdale admits that Murray was qualified for the position, but believes she was the most qualified candidate because of her seniority. [DE 33-2 at 85.] … Such a small difference in seniority does not rise to the level where it “jump[s] off the page” and “there can be no dispute among reasonable persons of impartial judgment that the plaintiff was clearly better qualified

BRC Rubber & Plastics, Inc. v. Continental Carbon Co.

876 F. Supp. 2d 1042 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 27, 2012

Earthgrains Refrigerated Dough Prods., Inc., 212 F.3d 373, 378 (7th Cir.2000) (rejecting plaintiffs contention that the agreement was a requirements contract and concluding that it was merely a “buyer’s option” where plaintiff “clearly … Section 1-205(4) of the UCC provides: “A course of dealing or course of performance between parties and any usage of trade ... give particular meaning to and supplement or qualify terms of an agreement.”

City of Hammond v. Lake County Judicial Nominating Commission

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 4, 2024

Is racial bias immunized when it motivates exclusion of an electorate with a high minority population rather than a more overt exclusion of minority voters specifically? … This factor clearly militates in favor of a finding that §2 is violated, in that state law overtly treats Lake County differently than most of Indiana’s other counties, and the State has admitted that the motivation for the

Decker v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 28, 2022

At the hearing, Plaintiff’s counsel stipulated that the VE was qualified to testify as a vocational expert. (AR 72-73). … See Brace, 970 F.3d at 821-23 (remanding where VE testimony did not clearly establish the method used, and counsel objected based on Alaura).

Bodnar v. Lake County Jail

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 21, 2020

1915A, I must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … This is so because the competence of a layman is clearly too limited to allow him to risk the rights of others.” Fymbo v. State Farm Fire and Cas.