Case law

BOWLING v. NETFLIX, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 6, 2023

The Court agrees that the information, which is not part of the pleadings, is clearly outside the scope of Rule 12(c). More importantly, the Court does not rely on those documents in reaching its decision. … Because, as discussed above, the Plaintiffs cannot establish conversion, they necessarily cannot establish theft either. Therefore, Plaintiffs' theft claim is not plausible on its face.

CRITTENDEN v. IPPELL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 16, 2020

Crittenden's foot condition is not an objectively serious medical need under the Eighth Amendment, dkt. 152 at 18, but as defendants concede, there is no specific Seventh Circuit case law "that clearly identifies whether … Crittenden may have believed he should have qualified for a bottom bunk pass because of his condition of flat feet, but this provides no evidence that Wexford maintained an unconstitutional policy or widespread practice

Dameron v. City of Scottsburg, Ind.

36 F. Supp. 2d 821 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 18, 1998

I.The City’s Duty to Briana To establish liability for negligence, a plaintiff must establish three elements: (1) that the defendant owes the plaintiff a duty to conform its conduct to a standard of care arising from its … The second Mullin factor, that the City must have known that inaction could lead to harm, is clearly satisfied here.

RASHAD v. USF HOLLAND LLC

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 24, 2024

Instead, Defendants maintain the burden of proof and they must demonstrate that Rashad's lawsuit is untimely by establishing the date of receipt for the notice of right to sue. See Prince v. … The ADA prohibits discrimination "against a qualified individual on the basis of a disability." 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a).

GRIFFITH v. GEO GROUP, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 4, 2022

The document does not clearly evidence that Nurse Bergeson denied Mr. Griffith's request related to his shoulders. … Bowen's notes clearly indicate that such step was only "possible," and was not a "definitive" order. Though Mr.

FOSTER v. SAUL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 9, 2019

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. … Given the paucity of the evidence before the ALJ relevant to this issue and the lack of evidence clearly contradicting the additional evidence offered by Nelson before the Appeals Council, that evidence, if considered

AMERICAN ART CLAY COMPANY, INC. v. THE CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 31, 2025

First, it is well established in Indiana that "[t]he lack of diligent investigation alone is not sufficient to support an award" for a breach of the duty of good faith. Erie Ins. Co. v. … As discussed above, the Asbestos Exclusions clearly bar coverage for the Lawsuits. It is also important to note that AMACO has not pleaded facts which evidence any dishonesty or ill will. Colley v. Ind. Farmers Mut.

WEST v. WILCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 12, 2023

Nor has it clearly articulated a basis on which the Court can find that what Plaintiff seeks is overly broad or not proportional to the case. … A document does not become immune to discovery simply because it intertwines or "embeds" relevant information with the non-relevant.

RANSOM v. KNIGHT

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 10, 2022

They may be correct that an amputated limb, without more, does not qualify as a serious medical need. See Johnson v. … Classifications "B" and "D" clearly do not apply, leaving "C" as the only plausible alternative. No reasonable jury could find that Nurse Shuck was deliberately indifferent for concluding that Mr.

L.W. v. ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF INDIANAPOLIS, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 21, 2022

She noted that the Retaliation Incident was "clearly not the first or only issue of concern." [Filing No. 69 at 2-3.] … Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act provides that "[n]o otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States ... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in

DULWORTH v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 22, 2024

ourts may pass over the antecedent question of whether a violation occurred, moving directly to whether the defendant negligently or willfully violated the statute," which "is akin to the sequencing dilemma courts face in qualified … immunity cases."

A WOMAN'S CHOICE-EAST SIDE WOMEN'S CLIN. v. Newman

132 F. Supp. 2d 1150 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 30, 2001

Both decisions left open the possibility, however, that additional evidence on the effects of such laws could establish an undue burden. … Notwithstanding the contention and controversy, some broad principles have been established by the Supreme Court.

DAVIS v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 2, 2022

ALJ Decision In determining whether Glenda qualified for benefits under the Act, the ALJ employed the five-step sequential evaluation process set forth in 20 C.F.R … When confronted with a situation where the record does not clearly demonstrate that a claimant's past work was a composite job, courts in this Circuit have examined several factors in reviewing the ALJ's determination,

BERRY v. COMMISSIONER OF INDIANA

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 26, 2021

Accordingly, his treatment and the conditions of his confinement are evaluated under standards established by the Eighth Amendment's proscription against the imposition of cruel and unusual punishment. … Assuming that Berry's mental health diagnoses qualified as serious medical conditions, there is no evidence that any Defendant was deliberately indifferent to those conditions.

WILSON v. TRANSUNION, LLC

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 6, 2025

The notice must clearly and concisely state in plain, easily understood language: (i) the nature of the action; (ii) the definition of the class certified; (iii) the class claims, issues, or defenses; (iv) that … Notice will also be published on a website established by the Administrator. Id.

Baltimore County v. AT & T CORP.

735 F. Supp. 2d 1063 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 20, 2010

The court clearly assumed, however, that the owners had a right to seek an injunction (presumably for ejectment) for the improper expansion of the use of the railroad easement. 15 . … The court does not reach the County’s reliance on the common law doctrine of nellum tempus occuirit regi, translated as “time does not run against the king,” which stems from principles of sovereign immunity.

DURHAM v. FRESHREALM, LLC

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 22, 2021

The fact that Nguyen is non-white—of East Asian descent—is insufficient by itself to qualify as a background circumstance or evidence of something suspicious. … A legitimate expectation of employee conduct was clearly established, and Durham has not demonstrated that he was meeting FreshRealm's performance expectations during and after the July 8 Call preceding his termination.

BROWN v. CARTER

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 29, 2025

Snyders, 990 F.3d 539, 544 (7th Cir. 2021) ("A preliminary injunction is an exercise of a very far-reaching power, never to be indulged in except in a case clearly demanding it.") … As a practical matter, there are not enough lawyers willing and qualified to accept a pro bono assignment in every pro se case. See Watts v.

Risk v. Ford Motor Co.

48 F. Supp. 2d 1135 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 29, 1999

The facts alleged in Risk’s amended complaint demonstrate that she clearly knew in 1994 that two male employees received overtime hours and that she did not. … In short, the facts alleged in Risk’s own amended complaint demonstrate that Ford’s acts of denying her overtime and reclassifying/transferring her scarcely qualify as the type of “covert” practices of discrimination that

Omega Satellite Products Co. v. City of Indianapolis

536 F. Supp. 371 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 26, 1982

(d) The operator shall furnish each subscriber written instructions that clearly set forth procedures for placing a service call or requesting an adjustment. … Such interconnection shall be made within the time limit established by the City.