Case law

Miles v. Neal

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 6, 2022

Qualified Immunity. … Rettele, 550 U.S. 609, 616 (2007) (once the court determines there to be no constitutional violation, “there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity”); Chavez v.

Talley-Smith

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 10, 2025

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 … procedural due process was overlooked, however, the Court directs Plaintiff to [DE 42 at 5-6], where that claim is addressed and reminds him that “[a] public official or employee is entitled to quasi-judicial absolute immunity

Mayberry v. Reagle

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

. § 1915A, the court must review the complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. … With respect to his diet, he is specifically concerned about peanut butter and jelly sandwiches because he lacks sufficient information regarding their ingredients to determine whether they qualify as halal.

Bishop v. Indiana Dept of Correction

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 3, 2021

Further factual development may establish that Grams and Colvill’s actions fit into those scenarios. … Williams, 682 F.3d 654, 658 (7th Cir. 2012) (“The Eleventh Amendment provides states with immunity from suits in the federal courts unless the State consents to the suit or Congress has abrogated their immunity.”).

Rager v. Dukes

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 28, 2021

Other Claims and Qualified Immunity In his Amended Complaint, Mr. … Rager’s constitutional rights, they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Belden v. Heckler

586 F. Supp. 628 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 7, 1984

Establishment of a disability which would entitle plaintiff to benefits under the Social Security Act is a two-step process. … An examination of recent slip opinions from our Court of Appeals clearly demonstrates the care with which an ALJ must develop the record in the procedural context of this case. In Strittmatter v.

Palta v. Marshall County Indiana Sheriff's Department

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 18, 2019

These allegations bring Trooper Strong within the immunity provided by the ITCA. … As to the race discrimination claim, Count II alleges that Rahul Palta “had the clearly established constitutional right to be free from racial discrimination in law enforcement by police officers and to enjoy the equal

Pavlock v. Holcomb

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 31, 2021

Since the Seventh Circuit has not clearly limited Coeur d’Alene’s reach, this Court still finds it to be applicable to the facts of this case. exception recognized in Coeur d’Alene. … Without a clearly established property interest in the land, the subsequent state clarification—either by the judiciary or the legislature of where the boundary between state and private property and where the public

White Eagle Cooperative Assoc. v. Johanns

508 F. Supp. 2d 664 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 21, 2007

Moreover, numerous Circuit Court decisions have established the purpose of the affidavit requirement. See Gibson v. … Lyng, non-pooled milk does not qualify as milk purchased from producers. County Line Cheese Co. v.

Crowley v. Sheriff

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

Crowley does not allege that jail staff opened mail to or from his attorney clearly designated as such outside his presence. … Filing a grievance or lawsuit qualifies as “protected activity” for purposes of a First Amendment claim. Holleman v. Zatecky, 951 F.3d 873, 879 (7th Cir. 2020). The court will presume that Mr.

Jiggetts v. Arkmark

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 26, 2023

Jiggetts indicates this happened before he was confined, but that is impossible since he was clearly an inmate at the jail when this happened. It is most likely he was a pretrial detainee. … However, for a pre-trial detainee to establish a claim under the Fourteenth Amendment, “it will not be enough to show negligence or gross negligence.” Miranda v.

Browne v. Ciobanu

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 25, 2025

These examples, which are a few of many, clearly demonstrate that the facts and issues currently before this Court were already presented to Judge DeGuilio in the prior litigation. … The Amended Complaint does not offer a qualifying crime, let alone any facts allowing the Court to discern one. It merely recites select portions of the CVRA.

Riddle by and Through Brewster v. Innskeep

675 F. Supp. 1153 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 23, 1987

The dispute is whether the defendants’ actions deprived the plaintiffs of privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution of the United States. A. … The applicability of the eighth amendment may be an academic question, in any event, since Riddle is clearly entitled to fourteenth amendment protections, which one court has deemed “more protective.”

King v. Hartford Packing Co., Inc.

189 F. Supp. 2d 917 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 13, 2002

The Kings’ and Luellen’s Tomato Shipments Hartford was established in approximately 1910. … As a result, Gruber recommended establishing a “PACA Reserve” as a condition of issuing the loan to Hartford.

Howard

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 8, 2026

immunity. … But because this issue was not briefed, the Court will not address qualified immunity here.

Vodde v. Indiana Michigan Power Co.

852 F. Supp. 676 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 28, 1994

DISCUSSION The threshold question before the Court is whether Bafile, in regard to the ADA, can be considered a “covered entity” who could be liable for discriminating in employment matters against a qualified individual … In today’s current litigation environment, employers are attuned to employee discriminatory conduct and have established elaborate monitoring and response procedures.

Collins v. Michelin North America, Inc.

71 F. Supp. 2d 909 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 14, 1999

This, in the Court’s view does not, as defendant's suggest, “clearly establish!] … however, misconstrues plaintiffs’ complaint that they were discriminated against because of their disabilities — an argument akin to that presented and rejected in Wright when the respondents “argue[d] that Wright is not qualified

Robertson - RESTRICTED - ACCEPT ONLY CERTAIN FILINGS v. West

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 7, 2019

Only “genuine emergencies” qualify as a basis for circumventing § 1915(g). Lewis v. Sullivan, 279 F.3d 526, 531 (7th Cir. 2002). 1 (1) Robertson v. Spears, 1:15-CV-1405 (S.D. … He knows he must pre-pay the $400 filing fee unless he files a complaint clearly alleging he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Sheldon v. Munford, Inc.

660 F. Supp. 130 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 19, 1987

However, a fran-B chisor shall not be considered to be competing when operating a business either temporarily for a reasonable period of time, or in a bona fide retail operation which is for sale to any qualified independent … Clearly, contracting to provide less protection is something the parties could not do under Indiana law.

Lange v. B & P Motor Express, Inc.

257 F. Supp. 319 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 23, 1966

Snavely, 172 F. 212 (8th Cir. 1909). 3 The reasons which support the latter view are clearly more sound. … As lias already been mentioned, the rule is well established that evidence of prior acts of negligence is inadmissible as being both irrelevant and prejudicial to the defendant’s case. See note 4 above.