Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,350 results
1.32s
District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 10, 2026
Defendants argue that this allegation, even if true, fails to establish gross negligence, which requires more than ordinary negligence. (Dkt. 43 at 3). … This is the case except when the plaintiff alleges that the actions of the employee are "(1) criminal; (2) clearly outside the scope of the employee's employment; (3) malicious; (4) willful and wanton; or (5) calculated
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 3, 2024
State sovereign immunity, however odd it appears in principle, see, e.g., Erwin Chemerinsky, Against Sovereign Immunity, 53 Stan. L. Rev. 1201 (2001), is beyond this Court's power to reexamine. … Code §§ 33-33-49-13.1 (establishing "Marion County judicial selection committee"), 33-33-49-13.4 (providing for appointment by the Indiana governor of one judge from among three "most qualified candidates
Cited 0 timesUnknownSHIRK v. THE TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY
District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 29, 2022
. § 794 (prohibiting discrimination against an "otherwise qualified individual"). … Sept. 4, 2020)) (anti-discrimination law "does not 'immunize[ ] [the employee] from the consequences of her grossly unprofessional conduct.'
Cited 0 timesUnknownCoffman v. Indianapolis Fire Department
619 F. Supp. 2d 582 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 15, 2008
At that time, Plaintiff was certified as a qualified engineer with the State of Indiana to drive IFD’s fire vehicles of various types and sizes. She was also qualified as a paramedic. (Id. ¶¶ 15, 16). 3. … based upon 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , a plaintiff must show “(1) that ‘the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law’; and (2) that ‘this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities
Cited 1 timesPublishedUnited States of America, et al. v. Reid Physician Associates, Inc, et al.
District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 21, 2026
immunity." … This is not a case where the Complaint makes no attempt or makes a clearly insufficient attempt to plead fraud with particularity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownSouthern Illinois Grain Inspection Service, Inc. v. United States
881 F. Supp. 1229 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 17, 1995
UNITED STATES GRAIN STANDARDS ACT The Federal Grain Inspection Service was established by the United States Grain Standards Act in 1976. 7 U.S.C. §§ 71 et seq. … is better qualified.”
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · May 13, 2020
R 57(H), and therefore clearly a judicial act for which Chief Justice Rush is entitled to absolute judicial immunity. See Stump v. … Because this case is barred on sovereign immunity and absolute judicial immunity grounds, this dismissal is with prejudice.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMundell v. Beverly Enterprises-Indiana, Inc.
778 F. Supp. 459 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 12, 1991
Punitive damages are an established part of the recovery available to living plaintiffs in personal injury cases. 4 However, Indiana common law prohibits the survival of a cause of action when the plaintiff dies. … The statute in the past clearly limited recovery to a narrow list of damages which were all compensatory in nature.
Cited 6 timesPublished974 F. Supp. 693 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 18, 1997
A plaintiff basing her claim on the Rehabilitation Act must establish that: (1) she is an individual with disabilities; (2) she is otherwise qualified; (3) she is excluded from programs solely because of the handicap; and … The termination of Powers which is challenged in this case clearly did not cross into such forbidden territory.
Cited 4 timesPublished734 F. Supp. 2d 601 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 12, 2010
IV.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. … In addition, the ALJ’s opinion failed to acknowledge that Plaintiffs counsel had requested that Plaintiff be tested for mental retardation despite the fact that the record clearly indicates such a request. (R. 165).
Cited 0 timesPublished921 F. Supp. 559 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 29, 1996
That finding is clearly correct. … D.F. is a qualified individual with handicaps.
Cited 8 timesPublishedSchlumberger Well Services v. Blaker
623 F. Supp. 1310 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 23, 1985
categories which qualify for treatment as trade secrets. … BPB, no doubt, can find another qualified person to fill Blaker’s position.
Cited 3 timesPublished12 F. Supp. 3d 1144 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 25, 2014
However, the Supreme Court created an important exception to that immunity in Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 , 28 S.Ct. 441 , 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908). … Then in 1996, the Supreme Court decided Romer — the first case that clearly shows a change in direction away from Baker.
Cited 29 timesPublishedBLUE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESTORATION SERVICES, INC. v. LEGACY RESTO, LLC
District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 4, 2023
As a general matter, "a stay of discovery is warranted only when a party raises a potentially dispositive threshold issue such [as] standing, jurisdiction, or qualified immunity." Id. … As such, the Court concludes that Defendant Legacy has not met its burden of establishing that good cause exists for a stay of all case deadlines and discovery.
Cited 0 timesUnknownKINSELLA v. INDIANA UNIVERSITY HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES, INC.
District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 7, 2020
Kinsella’s argument that this case falls within an exception to the intra-corporate immunity doctrine—an argument that IU Health suggests was raised for the first time in Dr. … In his September 27, 2019 Order, Judge Brookman stated, “[a]s part of the decision to re-open the case, the Court agreed to re-establish the remaining deadlines in this matter (i.e. discovery for expert witness, damages
Cited 0 timesUnknown867 F. Supp. 813 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 27, 1993
This is clearly an objective test and does not require inquiry into the subjective mind of the taxpayer. … In addition, the Forms 870-P for the years of 1984,1985,1986 and 1987 clearly state that “the annual rate of interest payable on the partner’s tax deficiencies ... shall be 120% of the adjusted rate established under section
Cited 0 timesPublishedCommissioning Agents, Inc. v. Long
143 F. Supp. 3d 775 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 29, 2015
However, CAI fails to cite a single Seventh Circuit case which clearly supports this view and, instead, relies entirely on cases outside of the jurisdiction. … To begin, the Court notes that CAI’s claims do not clearly arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts.
Cited 6 timesPublished175 F. Supp. 2d 1132 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 6, 2001
The court said: “The law has been clearly established since at least the Supreme Court’s decision in Carroll v. … The court held therefore that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 6 timesPublishedJacobs v. Board of School Com'rs of City of Indianapolis
349 F. Supp. 605 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 19, 1972
No right is more clearly within the protection of the First Amendment, whose provisions Tinker v. … However, the remaining named plaintiffs are qualified as proper representatives of the class whose interest they seek to protect. Fujishima v. Bd. of Education, supra.
Cited 10 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 21, 2023
In any event, Officer Rebollar is entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is available when a defendant's conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna