Case law

Nesvold v. Bowen

683 F. Supp. 1246 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 14, 1988

This is similarly an illusory issue since the particular exhibits would not qualify as substantial evidence. … Neither did the Council clearly reject the AU’s express finding of credibility.

Carson v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.

882 F. Supp. 765 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 17, 1995

Under McDonnell Douglas, the employee must first establish a prima facie case to create a rebuttable presumption of discrimination. … “[A]n employer is free to choose an objectively less qualified candidate over a more qualified one.” See Courtney, 42 F.3d at 423 .

Jones v. B & J Rocket America, Inc.

148 F. Supp. 3d 755 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 1, 2015

As to the second prong, there is quite clearly a genuine issue of fact regarding Jones’ performance. … B & J states that it "does not admit or concede that the Plaintiff is a qualified individual for purposes of the ADA.

DeAmaral v. Porter County Jail

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 29, 2023

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 … “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.

Randle v. Pearson

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 27, 2025

“[I]t does not generally establish a right to a habitable home.” Id., at *2 (cleaned up). … Moreover, it does not meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, which requires specific facts, set forth in an affidavit or a verified complaint, that clearly show immediate and irreparable injury, loss

Zendian v. Indiana Department of Child Services

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 8, 2022

“The presumption is rebuttable, but it should not be 2 In the motion for summary judgment, Rich argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity on the § 1983 claim. … Because the Court finds that the Plaintiff has not established a constitutional violation, the Court need not consider the remainder of Rich’s argument for qualified immunity.

Miller v. Anderson

162 F. Supp. 2d 1057 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 19, 2000

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.’ ” Terry Williams, 120 S.Ct. at 1512. … Additionally, it is clear that the Indiana Supreme Court has not decided this issue in a manner “contrary to ... clearly established Federal law.”

Sanders v. Indiana Department of Child Services

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 8, 2021

Fourth, they argue that Defendants have Eleventh Amendment immunity. (Id. at 5–7.) The Court agrees that res judicata bars the suit and does not address the remaining arguments. … Additionally, if the “allegations clearly establish that it is the defendant’s actions in h[er] official capacity that form the basis for the constitutional deprivation which is alleged,” then the Court ordinarily assumes

Spates v. Grant Crizer

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 20, 2019

Local governments and municipalities may qualify as a “person” under § 1983. Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978). … As the movants on a motion to dismiss, the Defendants have failed to meet the burden of establishing the legal insufficiency of the Plaintiff’s loss of consortium claim. Yeksigian v.

Rodenbeck v. Marathon Petroleum Co.

742 F. Supp. 1448 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 19, 1990

This Lease contains the entire agreement between the parties, and there are no oral promises or other representations or understandings inducing its execution or qualifying its terms. … Kinzie asserts that the Releases “cancel only particular prior agreements that are clearly specified, and the release language clearly pertains only to claims arising out of the cancelled agreements.”

CWPMI, Inc. v. Lahey

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 22, 2025

Second, Plaintiff has not established that “illegal conduct” includes encouraging employees to breach their duty of loyalty. … Third, Plaintiff fails to establish that the tort of “unfair competition” qualifies as “illegal conduct.” Even if it does, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Defendant’s conduct amounts to as much.

Perrey v. Donahue

703 F. Supp. 2d 839 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 9, 2010

Clearly, Perrey is not a physician and has no medical training. Thus, he is not qualified to make medical judgments or render medical opinions about the proper course of treatment for his medical condition. … Clearly, Perrey has not submitted any admissible evidence establishing the existence of a genuine issue of material fact.

Hughes-Rodriguez v. Hartman

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 22, 2022

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.

University of Notre Dame v. Sebelius

988 F. Supp. 2d 912 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 20, 2013

Apart from women’s preventive healthcare, the broader section of the ACA on “Coverage of Preventive Health Services” also requires free coverage of immunizations and breast cancer screenings. See ACA § 2713. … The Establishment Clause Claim The Constitution’s First Amendment says that Congress can “make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

Jones v. Griffith

688 F. Supp. 446 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 25, 1988

Texas, the Court noted, had established a system for thorough state court review of the Commission’s orders. … Canterbury contains a lengthy and exceedingly thoughtful discussion of the doctrine of informed consent and clearly articulates the plaintiff’s position in this case—that lay witness testimony can competently establish a

Williams v. Anderson

174 F. Supp. 2d 843 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 19, 2001

established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” or (2) “involved an unreasonable application of ... clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States … 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 .

Church of the American Knights of Ku Klux Klan v. City of Gary

219 F. Supp. 2d 957 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 4, 2002

Finally, the dissenters chide the majority’s order of dismissal as “clearly dis-serving] the public interest.” … Pap’s subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because Pap’s had sold the real property upon which the establishment was located, indeed the establishment now housed a comedy club.

Zimmer Technology, Inc. v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp.

476 F. Supp. 2d 1024 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 22, 2007

All limitations of the claimed invention must be encompassed, and conception “is complete only when the idea is so clearly defined in the inventor’s mind that only ordinary skill would be necessary to reduce the invention … It is well established that “uncorroborated oral testimony by interested parties is insufficient as a matter of law to establish invalidity of [a] patent.” Lacks Ind., Inc. v.

Lafayette Beverage Distributors, Inc. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.

545 F. Supp. 1137 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 25, 1982

Bernard Crimmons must be active in the new company or someone highly qualified who An-heuser-Busch would approve. 62. … Designation of areas of primary responsibility have clearly been upheld under Section 1 of the Sher *1147 man Anti-Trust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 . Continental T. V., Inc. v.

Medical Assurance Co. v. Weinberger

973 F. Supp. 2d 925 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 24, 2013

Weinberger established various legal entities through which he practiced, including Mark Weinberger, M.D., P.C. … The Medical Malpractice Act establishes a comprehensive scheme addressing medical malpractice actions.