Case law

Peck v. Nelson

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 3, 2024

Peck cannot proceed against Judge Nelson because judges are immune from suit. A judge has absolute immunity for any judicial actions unless the judge acted in absence of all jurisdiction. Polzin v. … Duckworth, 65 F.3d 555, 561 (7th Cir. 1995) (“To recover damages under § 1983, a plaintiff must establish that a defendant was personally responsible for the deprivation of a constitutional right.”). Mr.

Loubser v. United States

606 F. Supp. 2d 897 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 30, 2009

However, it is also well established that pro se litigants are not excused from compliance with procedural rules. McNeil v. … Loubser’s three submissions consist of one thousand one-hundred eighty-nine (1,189) pages, 18 are not accompanied by a proper motion, and clearly go beyond the established boundaries set forth by Local Rule 7.1, this Court

Corcoran v. Buss

483 F. Supp. 2d 709 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 9, 2007

That ruling was an unreasonable application of these clearly established United States Supreme Court precedents. … The cases in this Court since Jackson have clearly established that not every burden on the exercise of a constitutional right, and not every pressure or encouragement to waive such a right, is invalid.

Trinidad v. City of East Chicago

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 12, 2021

Qualified Immunity Finally, defendants make a cursory argument that all defendants, except School City, are entitled to qualified immunity because there is no evidence that any … immunity must be denied.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. General Electric Co.

17 F. Supp. 2d 824 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 21, 1998

To proceed under the ADA, Smith must establish that he is an individual with a “disability” as defined by the Act. Smith’s burden of proving that he is a qualified individual with a disability is a “threshold matter.” … GE also points out that Smith’s per se argument is contrary to well-established law in this and other circuits. See Homeyer v.

Perry

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 3, 2026

Specifically, “[a] Rule 59(e) motion will be successful only where the movant clearly establishes ‘(1) that the court committed a manifest error of law or fact, or (2) that newly discovered evidence precluded entry of … However, Section 34-13-3-3 does not instill broad immunity, but rather immunity under particular circumstances.

Gomez v. City of South Bend

605 F. Supp. 1173 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 28, 1985

In order for Gomez to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under this analysis, he must show: (1) that he was qualified for the position of Assistant Personnel Director/EEO Officer; (2) that he was a member of a … To establish a prima facie case for disparate treatment, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was a member of a minority, applied for an available position for which he was qualified and was

Wright-Moore Corp. v. Ricoh Corp.

794 F. Supp. 844 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 10, 1991

Wright-Moore clearly meets this standard. 908 F.2d at 134-35 . … Defendant argues that Moore and Mood-ie do not establish that “recoverability” means a “no-risk” investment, but rather, the cases establish that a “no-risk” investment is clearly recoverable, and that a firm-specific investment

Drogosz v. Newkirk

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 23, 2023

The district court “ruled that Reed was entitled to qualified immunity on Clark’s retaliation claim because it was not clearly established that a threat to file a grievance was protected speech.” Id. at 354. … Drogosz argues this case is not relevant because “the Clark court clearly states the Bridges case does not clearly establish if a threat to file a grievance is protected speech.” ECF 10 at ¶ 34.

North American Van Lines, Inc. v. United States

217 F. Supp. 837 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 31, 1963

It is sufficient to note, without detailing the evidence, that plaintiff is likewise well qualified to handle the shipper’s transportation of uncrated pianos. … It should be noted that the record and findings made, after consideration of the exceptions, adequately establish the basis of the Commission’s action.

Agee v. Hickenbottom

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 16, 2024

Qualified Immunity As noted previously, Plaintiff did not suffer a constitutional violation, and therefore, an analysis of whether Defendants are entitled to qualified … immunity is moot.

Bird v. Figel

725 F. Supp. 406 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 22, 1989

Initially, defendants contend that the weight of the evidence clearly establishes that the suicide watch policy, under which Bird was confined in December, 1987 and February, 1988, was rationally related to a legitimate government … The hypothetical question clearly asked Dr.

Standard Register Co. v. Cleaver

30 F. Supp. 2d 1084 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 14, 1998

by operation of Ohio law (the law that governed the merger), became vested with: all assets and property of every description and every interest in the assets and property, wherever located, and the rights, privileges, immunities … Therefore, these matters do not appear to qualify as trade secrets.

Couch v. Schweiker

555 F. Supp. 651 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 28, 1982

Clearly if there was such a presumption following a proper termination of benefits, it would render the termination invalid. … Therefore, that same medical evidence is clearly insufficient to establish disability under the stricter standard applicable to disabled wid *657 ow’s benefits.

Mance

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 19, 2026

To establish a claim of defamation under Indiana law, “a plaintiff must establish (1) the existence of a communication with defamatory imputation, (2) malice, (3) publication, and (4) damages.” Neff v. … Kern] is the only person who should be immune if she did not act in malice . . . .” (ECF 20 at 3 (emphasis in original)). As Mr. Mance does not allege that Ms.

Felders v. Miller

776 F. Supp. 424 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 4, 1991

The elaborate medical evidence in the record of this case clearly establishes beyond any dispute that this plaintiff does not now have or has never contacted during the time frame alleged in this case the communicable disease … Seiter, 111 S.Ct. at 2321 , clearly establishes deliberate indifference as a standard of proof.

Heifner v. United States

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 20, 2020

Ex. 1, pp. 2-3, 7-12, 17-18). 14 establish claim). … Clearly, Heifner failed to assert any claim related to the 2015 surgery and the United States was without knowledge of the same.

Local Union No. 1423, Glaziers, Affiliate of Painters, Decorators, & Paperhangers of America v. P. P. G. Industries, Inc.

378 F. Supp. 991 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 12, 1974

Clearly, any arbitration order would not bind the Iron Workers because they are not party to the local agreement. … Certain material facts remain which were not contested by the parties but which have not been clearly established.

Coolman v. Robinson

452 F. Supp. 1324 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 20, 1978

Section 1343(3) and is authorized by Title 42, Section 1983 of the United States Code in that plaintiff sues to redress the deprivation, under color of the laws and statutes of the State of Indiana, of rights, privileges and immunities … Denying the plaintiff a license to sell alcoholic beverages because of his inability to satisfy a durational residency requirement is clearly and substantially different than denying a person the basic necessities of life

Flores v. Smith

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 14, 2022

Qualified Immunity Finally, the Defendants argue that the individual officers are entitled to qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna, 142 S.