Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,515 results
0.63s
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.
Cited 0 timesUnknown319 F. Supp. 2d 902 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 20, 2004
The standards a court employs in reviewing a motion for summary judgment are well-established. … The issue is whether the Plaintiffs 6.2 acres of converted wetland qualifies for the exemption as prior-converted wetland.
Cited 3 timesPublishedUnited States v. SCA Services of Indiana, Inc.
837 F. Supp. 946 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 10, 1993
In Allied, the defendant corporation argued that it was a dissolved corporation that had distributed its assets and was therefore immune from CERCLA liability. … If it is established through discovery that [the dissolved corporation] holds no assets whatsoever, then it no longer exists.
Cited 14 timesPublished31 F. Supp. 2d 1084 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 22, 1998
Sky Climber Inc., 79 F.3d 70, 73 (7th Cir.1996) Initially, Steele must establish that (1) she was a participant in a plan subject to ERISA; 8 (2) she was qualified for the position she held; and (3) she was discharged under … Clearly, from this testimony, Esmond did not have a final word as to the terms of Steele’s employment. 4 .
Cited 3 timesPublished729 F. Supp. 621 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 8, 1989
Claimant must be “disabled” in order to qualify for the benefits he requests. … [Y]ou [, Claimant,] have engaged in substantial gainful activity if— * * t * * •}> (2) Your work activity ... is clearly worth the amount shown in § 416.974(b)(2) when considered in terms of its value to the business, or
Cited 0 timesPublishedAtlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Universal Tool & Stamping Co.
735 F. Supp. 1404 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 23, 1990
Again, the case law clearly supports Atlantic’s contentions. In Student Public Interest Research Group v. … Universal claims that this administrative action qualifies as a “court action” and, as such, results in the preclusion of Atlantic’s claim under § 1365(b).
Cited 19 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 21, 2024
so he did not qualify for a boat. Ogle then asked Davis to order the inmate to remove all belongings from his bunk. Davis said Ogle could remove the items himself. … “Incarcerated people have a clearly established right to be free from physical harm inflicted by others in the institution.” Kemp v. Fulton Cnty., 27 F.4th 491, 494 (7th Cir. 2022) (citing Farmer v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 4, 2025
Taylor refers to the orders the court sent him as legal mail, but court orders do not qualify as legal mail. … Taylor has not identified any document that qualifies as legal mail.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 24, 2025
Neidlinger could see the cell clearly and he reasonably determined extracting McDuffy from the 1 Sgt. … Neidlinger is entitled to qualified immunity. 6
Cited 0 timesUnknownCraig v. Fed Ex Ground Package System, Inc.
722 F. Supp. 2d 1033 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 28, 2010
FedEx asserts that the undisputed evidence establishes the plaintiffs could present a claim and would receive a full and fair review of any such claim. … The court found that the “[defendants clearly preserved their right under ERISA to exclude from eligibility individuals classified as independent contractors.” Id.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 12, 2021
Gibson’s cell and, alternatively, that he is entitled to qualified immunity. Mr. Gibson filed a response in opposition, to which the warden filed a reply. (ECF 64, 67.) Mr. … That conclusion makes it unnecessary to address the warden’s qualified immunity argument. That leaves Mr.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 29, 2021
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 … To establish a violation of the right to access the courts, an inmate must show that unjustified acts or conditions hindered the inmate’s efforts to pursue a non-frivolous legal claim, and that actual harm resulted.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · May 4, 2021
Fogarty plausibly alleges that he is a qualified person with a disability and that he was excluded from this program solely because he is in a wheelchair. … To establish such a claim, he must allege “(1) he engaged in activity protected by the First Amendment; (2) he suffered a deprivation that would likely deter First Amendment activity in the future; and (3) the First Amendment
Cited 0 timesUnknown539 F. Supp. 2d 1069 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 11, 2008
Accepting the Defendants’ argument arguendo, this would clearly render the '577 patent, which utilizes magnetism to hold table pads together, obvious. … The Plaintiffs are correct that the pleadings and briefs together clearly establish that the Plaintiffs have been arguing all along that the two patents describe the same invention and are thus interfering patents.
Cited 3 timesPublishedJohnson v. Laporte County Sherriffs Dept
District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 19, 2025
Negligence or medical malpractice does not establish an Eighth Amendment violation. Walker, 940 F.3d at 965. … As an amputee, Johnson qualifies as an individual with a disability. Banks v. Patton, 743 F. App’x 690, 696 (7th Cir. 2018).
Cited 0 timesUnknownFilippo v. Lee Publications, Inc.
485 F. Supp. 2d 969 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 30, 2007
A: Because I think that he clearly, as it’s demonstrated here, should identify himself. … But that would be clearly understood going into it. Q: But it could be a concern. A: It could be.
Cited 27 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 24, 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 … “To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, the plaintiff must prove that he is a qualified individual with a disability, that he was denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity
Cited 0 timesUnknown132 F. Supp. 2d 688 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 6, 2001
Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) “qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’ ” Williams, 120 S.Ct. at 1512 . … Additionally, it is clear that the Indiana Supreme Court has not decided these claims in a manner “contrary to ... clearly established Federal law.”
Cited 4 timesPublishedConway v. Indiana State Prison
District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 2, 2022
Unit Team Manager Schneider also argues he is entitled to qualified immunity because “[i]t is not clearly established that failing to move an offender to a designated protective custody unit when the offender (1) is already … Benjamin, 293 F.3d 1030, 1037 (7th Cir. 2002) (holding that “a defendant may not avoid trial on the grounds of qualified immunity” if there are genuine issues of fact regarding the elements of the deliberate-indifference
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 4, 2025
As such, Murphy is financially qualified to proceed in forma pauperis. … ” the Court must dismiss the case if it determines that the action “(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna