Case law

Apuri v. Parkview Health System, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 23, 2020

The Plaintiff has not established the second element of his prima facie case. … The Plaintiff argues that, because he had some of the lowest mortality rates of physicians at Parkview, he must therefore have been qualified to hold medical privileges.

Sanders v. Astrue

894 F. Supp. 2d 1100 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 6, 2012

Sanders was limited to jobs with “no interactions with co-workers or the general public” (AR 15) because the DOT jobs listed by the VE clearly contemplate some interaction with co-workers. … Sanders establish the principle that an ALJ can’t simply state the outcome of the credibility assessment, but must explain the various factors and evidence that support the ultimate conclusion.

Graber v. MAD BREWER, INC.

773 F. Supp. 2d 765 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 24, 2011

However, without more, a plaintiffs subjective belief that she is more qualified than another employee does not establish pretext. See Johnson v. Nordstrom, Inc., 260 F.3d 727, 733 (7th Cir.2001). … Mad Brewer responds that they are not co-owners as Eric Brewer is the sole owner of Mad Brewer, but it does not clearly explain the roles that Neels and Stucky played. (Def.’s Reply 10.)

Knight v. Flakes

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 23, 2022

Here, Knight has not clearly identified what First Amendment activity he engaged in, what deprivation each defendant caused, nor why it is plausible it was motivated by the First Amendment activity. … To the extent he is seeking monetary damages, the Indiana Department of Correction has sovereign immunity. Wynn v. Southward, 251 F.3d 588, 592 (7th Cir. 2001).

Babrocky v. Jewel Food Co.

645 F. Supp. 1396 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 14, 1986

The Union shall refer applicants to the Employer from their records of available and qualified members who are seeking employment. … Furthermore, the uncontroverted evidence in this case clearly exonerated the Union from any responsibility for participation in, or nexus to these claims of plaintiffs.

Coopman v. United States

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 28, 2020

“It is the petitioner’s burden to establish both of these points.” Socha v. Boughton, 763 F.3d 674, 683 (7th Cir. 2014). … The Petitioner also fails to establish an extraordinary circumstance.

Sater

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 8, 2025

The burden to establish the admissibility of an expert's testimony by a preponderance of the evidence falls on its proponent. Varlen Corp. v. Liberty Mut. … First, he does not clearly signal that his comments regarding Mr.

Jean-Baptiste v. K-Z, Inc.

442 F. Supp. 2d 652 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 12, 2006

Jean-Baptiste seemed qualified for the position because he had prior lamination experience in a recreational vehicle manufacturing facility. (Helvey Dep. 39.) … That Helvey fired the first black person he hired is clearly insufficient to overcome this presumption and establish animus because Helvey “could have refused to hire [Jean-Baptiste] in the first place.” Id.

Johnson v. Neal

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 1, 2024

court 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 … He seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief for his conditions and requests an MRI of his head, chest, and lungs, physical therapy, a medical evaluation by a qualified medical practitioner, and a comprehensive mental

Orr v. Sevier

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 5, 2019

court 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 … A private company providing medical care in a prison performs a State function and can be held liable under the standard established in Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).

Hawkins v. Carter

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 15, 2021

However, Hawkins clearly names “Lieutenant Wilson” in the Complaint, so this argument by Defendants is a non-starter. [DE 1. … He may only proceed on this claim if it falls under an exception: Congress has abrogated the state’s immunity, the state waived its own immunity, or the remedy is prospective equitable relief for an ongoing constitutional

Muckenfuss v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 21, 2022

Muckenfuss’ claims based on his requests for an in-person ASL interpreter, flashing emergency lights on all forklifts/mules, and a Sorenson Video Phone remain time barred—a subject also clearly confined by the law of the … Muckenfuss must establish that (1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) Tyson was aware of his disability; and (3) Tyson failed to accommodate his disability reasonably. See Preddie v.

Troutman v. Liebel

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

“Legal mail” is entitled to greater protection, but this a term of art referring only to mail to or from the inmate’s legal counsel that is clearly identified on the envelope. Kaufman v. … Filing a grievance qualifies as “protected activity” for purposes of a First Amendment claim. Gomez, 680 F.3d at 866. However, Mr. Troutman has not satisfied the second and third prongs.

Ogle v. Gladieux

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 21, 2024

court 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 … Section 1983 does not establish a system of vicarious responsibility.” Id. at 593.

De Cola v. Starke County Council

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 29, 2021

immunity. … The Indiana courts were clearly Mr.

Harshaw v. Harshaw

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 4, 2021

Findings of fact are upheld unless clearly erroneous, but legal conclusions are reviewed de novo. Id.; In re Marrs–Winn, 103 F.3d 584, 589 (7th Cir. 1996). … “Claims brought as a common law spouse under the current Indiana dissolution of marriage or intestate succession statutes would clearly not be actionable.

Malone v. Ivers

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 19, 2023

Of note, the Policy states: The health services provided shall include reasonable preventive services, routine care as directed by qualified health care … Heights, 575 F.3d 664, 675 (7th Cir. 2009) (“It is well-established that when a particular course of action is directed by those who set municipal policy, the municipality is responsible under section 1983[.]”

Allen v. Galipeau

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 29, 2024

. § 1915A, to determine 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 from such relief. … She noted that one leg was clearly longer than the other. Allen told her that he felt a snap when he was injured and asked for an x-ray.

Spann-El v. Warden

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 28, 2023

Certainly licking someone’s face without their permission qualifies as offensive or discourteous, and Mr. Spann-El does not argue otherwise. … The mere fact that the hearing officer ruled against him does not establish impermissible bias. Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994).

Gabriel III v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 8, 2020

Plaintiff maintains that the ALJ was not qualified to interpret the significance of this medical data. Moon v. … In any event, the ALJ was not qualified to determine the significance of these medical findings. Lambert v.