Case law

BIOCONVERGENCE LLC v. ATTARIWALA

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 23, 2020

Singh’s contacts qualify as “purposeful direction.” Our read of Commissioning Agents leaves us convinced, as Mr. … Singh’s contacts—to wit, his refusals to act—qualify as “expressed aiming.”

Roche Diagnostics Corp. v. Inverness Medical Technology, Inc.

186 F. Supp. 2d 914 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 24, 2002

As discussed above, the arbitrator neither clearly found in favor of Roche on the fraud claim nor clearly accepted Roche’s claim construction if he found for Roche on the fraud claim. … Here, even with reference to the preferred embodiment of oxidation of glucose to gluconic acid, the patent qualifies the extent of the reaction using “substantially.”

Puller Mortgage Associates, Inc. v. Keegan

829 F. Supp. 1507 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 30, 1993

Upon reviewing that proposal, the HUD, FHA, and GNMA representatives assured Puller that if the contemplated recapitalization were accomplished and warehouse lines of credit were established as outlined in the reinstatement … The court concurs, finding that the Preliminary Agreement/Letter of Intent, as twice amended, clearly constitutes a binding contract. 17 See Venture Associate Corp. v.

Curtis v. Astrue

623 F. Supp. 2d 957 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 18, 2009

Standard for Disability In order to qualify for disability benefits under the Act, Plaintiff must establish that he suffers from a “disability” as defined by the Act. … Additionally, remand is necessary to more clearly evaluate pain in accordance with SSR 96-7p.

American Commercial Lines, LLC v. Northeast Maritime Institute, Inc.

588 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 1, 2008

Conceding that contract was executed in Indiana, NMI nonetheless argues that a contract alone does not establish the minimum contacts necessary to satisfy due process. … As the substance of Judge Stearns's opinion shows, however, this is not a situation that qualifies for issue preclusion because the issues are not the same.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. COMMUNITY HEALTH NETWORK, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 27, 2023

[Did not qualify in 2010.] … This instruction was not ambiguous and clearly requires CHN to provide "complete, narrative answers . . . without reference to documents."

MOSLEY v. TARGET CORPORATION

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

Mosley Is Not a Qualified Individual with a Disability. … To establish a failure to accommodate claim under the ADA, the plaintiff must show that: (1) he is a qualified individual with a disability, (2) the defendant was aware of his disability, and (3) the defendant failed to

United States v. Danser

110 F. Supp. 2d 807 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 6, 1999

Clearly, these statements were untrue. … Rather, the inquiry is only whether a defendant has established insanity as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 17 .

Higginbottom Ex Rel. Davis v. Keithley

103 F. Supp. 2d 1075 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 6, 1999

No. 2144, 45 F.Supp.2d 664, 670 (D.Minn.1999) (despite state’s recognition that personnel handbooks may qualify as contracts in the employer-employee context, that state’s law has never suggested that a student/school district … Even assuming that Brunson knew plaintiffs’ socio-economic status and that plaintiffs were from low-income families (neither of these propositions having been clearly drawn from the record), plaintiffs fail to demonstrate

Indiana Grocery Co. v. Super Valu Stores, Inc.

684 F. Supp. 561 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 26, 1988

All these rules are qualified as not helpful if predation can be shown. … finding of no specific intent was clearly erroneous in light of the plaintiffs’ failure to establish these other factors.

MARTE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 18, 2026

Ass'n, 555 U.S. 353, 363 (2009) ("[A] political subdivision, created by a state for the better ordering of government, has no privileges or immunities under the Federal Constitution which it may invoke in opposition to … "[T]he powers and duties" of the sheriff's office are then "established by the [Indiana] Legislature." Delk v. Bd. of Comm'rs of Delaware Cnty., 503 N.E.2d 436, 440 (Ind. Ct. App. 1987); see Ind.

Planned Parenthood of Indiana & Kentucky, Inc. v. Commissioner, Indiana State Department of Health

258 F. Supp. 3d 929 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 28, 2017

It is clear that the statutory provisions at issue qualify as penal' statutes under prevailing law, given that any physician who performs an abortion on an unemancipated minor without obtaining proper identification and documentation … This holding clearly has no relevance to the issues before us. . We are not persuaded at this juncture that the mens rea requirements in the criminal statute enforcing the abortion requirements, Csee Ind.

Weil v. Metal Technologies, Inc.

260 F. Supp. 3d 1002 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 26, 2017

If that employee cannot perform the overtime, the Plant Manager will offer the overtime to a suitably qualified person who is available to perform the overtime work. … The Court notes, however, that Plaintiffs consistently overstate the purported admissions made by Metal Technologies and identify facts as undisputed when Metal Technologies clearly disputes them.

WOOLSEY v. WILSON

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 6, 2020

Revell has never received medical training and was not qualified to provide medical care to inmates or evaluate inmates regarding their medical care. Id. As Regional Director, Ms. … In his role, Warden Julian did not treat patients or participate in clinical medical decisions and was not qualified to do so. Id., ¶ 6.

Bowman v. City of Indianapolis

927 F. Supp. 309 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 24, 1996

. §§ 541 et seq., require that, in order to qualify as an overtime-exempt executive, administrative or professional employee, an employee must meet both parts of a two-part test. The first part is a “duties test.” … Or to take another example, is a bank vice president, who clearly meets the duties test for an executive employee, and who is paid $100,000 per year, to be considered an hourly employee just because she might be docked a

CUTCHIN v. ANONYMOUS HEALTHCARE PROVIDER 1

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

Provider 1 is a “qualified provider” subject to and governed by the provisions of the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act. … In his Reply Brief, Cutchin argued that clearly the PCF contests liability, which is not permitted under the MMA (Filing No. 91 at 6–7).

PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS, INC. v. WILDLIFE IN NEED AND WILDLIFE IN DEED, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 3, 2020

But these affidavits do not create a genuine dispute because—like Stark—none of the volunteers is qualified to give expert testimony. … A healthy immune system provides defense against disease and parasites through the rest of the Cub's life. (Id.).

Haltom v. Tiernan & Hoover, Inc.

976 F. Supp. 2d 1007 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2013

Sub-Part B uses the article “the” to identify the employer, clearly referring to the same employer referenced in SubPart A who “ceas[ed] to have an obligation to contrib *1019 ute under the plan.” … If Congress sought to characterize this situation as a complete withdrawal within the construction industry, it would have included in SubPart B reference(s) to “the employer” or another employer qualifying as that employer

EARL v. COLVIN

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 30, 2024

Once step four is satisfied, the burden shifts to the SSA to establish that the claimant is capable of performing work in the national economy." Knight v. Chater, 55 F.3d 309, 313 (7th Cir. 1995). … It is well-known that an ALJ may not interpret an MRI that has not been reviewed by a medical expert, as the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals clearly stated in Akin v.

PUCILLO v. NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 19, 2021

Pucillo argues there are no factual disputes, and NCS's letters clearly violate Sections 1692e and 1692c of the FDCPA. … Nor does stress by itself with no physical manifestations and no qualified medical diagnosis amount to a concrete harm. Cf. United States v. All Funds on Deposit with R.J.