Case law

Dodd v. Warden

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

Dodd was denied the opportunity to present evidence, he must establish that the denial of the evidence resulted in actual prejudice rather than harmless error. Piggie, 342 F.3d at 666. … Dodd asks for appointment of counsel for the evidentiary hearing (ECF 37) and appointment of counsel for pretrial and trial matters (ECF 42), he has clearly shown he understood the facts in this case and was capable of

Gillis v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 23, 2019

Clearly, the Commissioner’s argument is without merit. … A claimant must provide credible testimony and objective evidence to qualify for disability insurance benefits for allegations of disabling pain (Moothart v. Bowen, 934 F.2d 114, 117 (7th Cir. 1991)).

Turner v. United States

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 12, 2023

The Supreme Court has “long held that a plea does not qualify as intelligent unless a criminal defendant first receives ‘real notice of the true nature of the charge against him, the first and most universally recognized … The Court recognized that “a judge’s ‘ordinary efforts at courtroom administration’ or docket management are ‘immune’ from claims of bias or partiality,” id. (citing United States v.

Elkins v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 5, 2024

administrative law judge (“ALJ”) held a hearing, taking testimony from Elkins, who was represented by a qualified representative from his counsel’s law firm, and a vocational expert. (AR 44-76; see AR 89-90). … WL 5526631, at *3 (“Rather than discussing any of these facts showing limitations in . . . crouching, the ALJ instead focused on signs of improvement and progress during a time Plaintiff was recovering from surgery and clearly

Sierra Club v. BP Products North America Inc

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 14, 2021

Qualifying limitations include any “condition or requirement of a permit under part C of subchapter I (relating to significant deterioration of air quality)” § 7604(f)(3), or “any other standard, limitation, or schedule … Judge Martin appropriately recognized that the Seventh Circuit has very clearly “rejected this view,” and that the 0.010 lb/mmBtu limit is also actionable under section 7604(f)(4). [DE 29 at 7 (citing McEvoy v.

Close Armstrong LLC v. Trunkline Gas Company

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 31, 2023

With an express grant of an easement, Indiana protects the right of the parties to state clearly its scope and future uses. … App. 1979) (“a limitation[] which would terminate an easement must be clearly established”).

Garza v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

As held in Antonio P, the ALJ was not qualified to second guess these medical professionals opinions and the ALJ should have explained how he considered Plaintiff’s medication. … Clearly, the ALJ failed to build an accurate and logical bridge between evidence and conclusion in addressing Plaintiff’s subjective symptoms.

Stanley v. MSD OF SW ALLEN COUNTY SCHOOLS

628 F. Supp. 2d 902 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 29, 2008

s IEP clearly was not reasonably calculated to confer educational benefit on M.C."); Pl. … As noted above in footnotes 55 and 57, both Kris Kirby and Cheryl Carter were qualified teachers. *969 4.

Greene

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 1, 2026

Greene purports to partially admit a fact advanced by Trelleborg, but provides no explanation qualifying her admission, (id. ¶ 62 (“[p]artially admit[ing]” a fact with no additional explanation)), leaves a blank space … But it is her argument for Trelleborg’s liability as an employer that most clearly falls flat. Trelleborg argues that Ms.

Forest River, Inc. v. inTech Trailers, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 20, 2023

STANDARD A witness may testify in the form of an expert opinion when (1) the witness is “qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, expertise, training, or education;” (2) the testimony … Still, the proponent of expert testimony must establish its admissibility by a preponderance of the evidence. Varlen Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 924 F.3d 456, 459 (7th Cir. 2019).

Kohne-Gaier v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2020

Plaintiff argues that the ALJ ignored records establishing Plaintiff’s carpal tunnel syndrome, and that the ALJ impermissibly cherry-picked evidence in reaching his conclusion that Plaintiff had not established such an … , she might well have reached a different conclusion”).4 This is especially true where, as discussed below, the numbers of jobs that could be performed by Plaintiff in the national economy was, at the very least, not clearly

Lovato v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 10, 2019

Walmart says that because Lovato cannot establish a question of fact as to the second, third, or fourth elements, her claim fails. … Like with the status-based claims, Walmart argues that Lovato cannot establish that she performed up to Walmart’s legitimate expectations and that she cannot establish that she was treated less favorably than employees

Pinnacle Treatment Centers, Inc. v. Crown Point, Indiana City of

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

Pinnacle sought a variance requesting that the City not enforce the ordinance so long as residents at the property qualified as disabled, as defined by the Fair Housing Act, and that the City not enforce the ordinance so … The parties do not appear to dispute that the residents at the home suffer from substance abuse disorder (Crown Point certainly doesn’t argue to the contrary), and thus qualify as handicapped under the Act.

Sater

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 27, 2026

Caldwell is not qualified to testify on Mr. Sater’s need for pain management because he is “not a pain management physician.” … Zimmerman’s analysis did not comport with established practice. The Court denies Defendants’ motion in limine. 11. Motion to Bar testimony of Dr.

Merriman

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 6, 2026

Disability Standard To qualify for DIB and SSI, a claimant must be “disabled” as defined under the Act. … None of the assessed RFC limitations—such as the ALJ’s limitation to only simple instructions and simple work-related decisions—appear to clearly address fatigue. See, e.g., Allensworth v.

McGuire v. Thompson

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 1, 2022

To the contrary, the facts and legal issues are clearly set forth in the extensive briefing and medical records. Mr. … The doctor’s impression was that the wrist was healed, and she told him he did not qualify for a special housing pass. (Id. at 34.)

Bestwick v. Newmar Corporation

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 17, 2021

App. 1969) (affirmation of fact “was clearly intended that defendant should rely thereon and the defendant did rely thereon”); Hix v. Bos. Sci. Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197384, 15 (D. Ariz. … warranty claim, but the Arizona Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, id. at 385, 391, specifically recognizing “[t]his written warranty made by [the manufacturer] to the ‘owner’ of the mobile home does not qualify

Harris v. Regal-Beloit America, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 27, 2023

for the position; and (4) the employer [hired] someone outside the protected group who was not better qualified than the plaintiff.” … First, it claims that Plaintiff “cannot establish any decisionmaker knew he had ever complained of age discrimination.” (ECF No. 62-1 at 15) (original emphasis). The Court cannot agree.

Mouser v. Keystone RV Company

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 13, 2023

Mouser intended to proceed under,1 on summary judgment, he has clearly chosen OCPA. (DE 28 at 24–25.) … The breach of warranty could not qualify as a misrepresentation because OCPA does not exist as a vehicle for double recovery in breach of contract cases.

Neurology and Pain Management Associates P.C. v. Bunin

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 22, 2021

In the MOU, the parties are clearly identified: Anthony E. Bunin and Steven Posar. Second, the subject matter of the MOU is clearly set forth: Dr. … Three elements are required to establish this confidential relationship between parties: “First, the claimant must establish that there was ‘an unequal relationship between