Case law

Northern Indiana Gun & Outdoor Shows, Inc. v. Hedman

104 F. Supp. 2d 1009 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 8, 2000

NIGOS, as the plaintiff, bears the burden of establishing that the conduct contains an expressive component. See Clark v. … The NIGOS gun show rules that clearly told exhibitors in bold lettering that “All guns must have tie-downs,” and exhibitors were required to read and agree to abide by the rule, and Mr.

Carson v. McGuinness

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 9, 2020

Plaintiff also sued Joe McGuinness in his official capacity as the Commissioner of INDOT, invoking the Ex parte Young exception to the State’s sovereign immunity. … The text messages suggested that Plaintiff communicated his opinion that Farlow was clearly the most qualified candidate.

Thomas

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

The offense and the murder of Frank Freund The evidence at trial established the following. … A reasonable decision not to raise an argument, “even if clearly wrong in retrospect, cannot support a claim that counsel’s conduct was deficient.” Spiller v.

Taghon v. St Joseph County Indiana

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 2, 2020

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 … However, because he “did not have a clearly established right to a seatbelt, Dale v. Agresta, 771 F. App’x 659, 661 (7th Cir. 2019), he does not state a claim against either Mike Fulnecky or C. Rutkowski.

Irvin v. Dowd

153 F. Supp. 531 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 8, 1957

In 'face of the allegations of exhaustion of remedies in his petition, the petitioner offered in evidence the transcript filed by him on his appeal to the Supreme Court of Indiana which clearly establishes the fact that after … The trial judge was satisfied that the twelve jurors sworn were qualified and after reading their entire voir dire examination we can find no evidence which would warrant this or any other court holding that they were anything

French v. Hope

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 22, 2023

Hope claims that he’s entitled to qualified immunity, and GCS argues that it bears no liability even if Dr. Hope were to be found liable. … Hope’s qualified immunity defense. Moreover, because Plaintiffs have not shown that Dr.

Marnocha v. City of Elkhart

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 27, 2019

Whether a position qualifies as policymaking is a determination that “may be done without a finder of fact when the duties and responsibilities of a particular position are clearly defined by law and regulations.” … As such, she also qualifies as an immediate adviser with respect to constitutional or legal powers.

Bostic v. Pence

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

Murray were entitled to qualified immunity, and that Bostic had conceded the remaining state defendants were not liable. [See DE 249]. … On one hand, there is clearly a common core of operative facts between the claims Bostic lost at summary judgment and the claim she won at trial.

Keel v. Carter

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 27, 2020

. § 1915A, I 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. … Even if Officer Bisher was qualified to initiate criminal proceedings, which seems unlikely, it is unclear how declining to do so relates to Keel’s safety.

Stults v. International Flavors & Fragrances, Inc.

31 F. Supp. 3d 1015 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 11, 2014

First, defendants contend that the Stults cannot establish proximate cause for their failure to warn claim because they cannot establish that, but for defendants’ failure to warn ConAgra about the potential health risks associated … Changing ConAgra’s warnings As noted above, defendants contend that the Stults cannot establish proximate cause for their failure to warn claim because they cannot establish that, but for defendants’ failure to warn ConAgra

Baker v. Megan

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 25, 2024

He asserts that it is clearly stated in his medical records that he is allergic to this medication and Nurse Practitioner Megan failed to check before she prescribed this medication. … Negligence or medical malpractice does not establish an Eighth Amendment violation. Walker v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc., 940 F.3d 954, 964 (7th Cir. 2019); Roe v. Elyea, 631 F.3d 843, 857 (7th Cir. 2011).

Crist v. Bowen

682 F. Supp. 412 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 23, 1988

Shively would be more qualified to express an opinion as to the effects of such a condition, than the AU. Dr. … Finally, assuming the plaintiff could be seen to fit under paragraph one of SSR 83-12, she is clearly excluded from the proposed line of thinking by paragraph two.

United States v. Collazo

798 F. Supp. 513 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 8, 1992

Collazo was summoned to appear, under a grant of immunity, before a federal grand jury investigating Max Perez, Larry Jackson, and others. While under oath before that grand jury, Mr. … Section 2J1.3, which applies to most perjury sentences, ordinarily establishes a base offense level of 12.

Bundy v. Dollar Tree

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 19, 2024

Here, Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [DE 2] establishes that she is unable to prepay the filing fee. … Id., at ¶ 6; • “The facts alleged by Plaintiff clearly identify a dispute arising from the Plaintiff’s purchase of a product called Chap-[e]ze on or about November 24

Manning v. The Lutheran Foundation, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 10, 2024

There was an established salary range for each position along with guidelines for placing an individual in a particular pay range. (Id. ¶ 129). … Simply put, Manning is not “clearly better qualified” than Scarberry. Manning has the educational degrees. Nobody questions her drive.

Brown v. Warden

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 4, 2019

We have explained that clearly established Federal law for purposes of §2254(d)(1) includes only the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of this Court’s decisions. … The prosecution responded that they were willing to grant him use immunity and could reach an agreement prior to Monday. Id. at 23.

Wiseman v. Autozone, Inc.

819 F. Supp. 2d 804 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 26, 2011

“A plaintiff that reports [sexual harassment] to the police clearly ‘opposes’ it within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a).” Worth v. … But, obviously, knowledge alone does not establish causation.

Rayford v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.

851 F. Supp. 1247 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 28, 1994

At Chapter 10, entitled, “Plan Administration,” the SPD clearly states that the Board of Trustees has such discretionary power. … Clearly, Central States is not limited to the terms of the SPD to assert that the Board of Trustees has such discretionary authority.

Knighten v. Marthakis

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 9, 2023

obtain permanent injunctive relief for constitutionally adequate medical care for his chronic diarrhea and foot warts as required by the Eighth Amendment. 2 Warden Neal also argues he is entitled to qualified … immunity on this claim, but “[q]ualified immunity does not apply to a claim for injunctive relief[.]”

United States v. Ciurinskas

976 F. Supp. 1167 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 18, 1997

When necessary for clarity, the term will be qualified by referring to specific companies or battalions. 38. … Because the documents clearly show that he applied for benefits on account of his service, the present denial, and false explanation, appear to be part of the long history of concealment and denial of Schutzmannsehaft service