Case law

Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Lockhart

5 F. Supp. 2d 667 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 7, 1998

Clearly this will be most critical as plans are implemented to position your successor.” Ex. 145. … The roofing industry clearly thinks and talks about these as two separate markets.

Trahan v. Interactive Intelligence Grp., Inc.

308 F. Supp. 3d 977 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 28, 2018

The Management Forecasts are clearly forward-looking statements within the meaning of the PSLRA. … The Union Square Analysis is clearly a forward-looking statement within the meaning the PSLRA.

WOODS v. BROWN

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 11, 2022

Reeves, like the other Defendants, argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity because "[i]t was not clearly established in August 2019 that moving Plaintiff from LHU to GHU due to his INP status constitutes a First

Government Suppliers Consolidating Services, Inc. v. Bayh

753 F. Supp. 739 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 27, 1990

Although evenhanded in its text, the provision is not immune from constitutional scrutiny. … The Act was clearly the product of compromise among the House and Senate sponsors and the Governor. It clearly had bipartisan support.

KEEYLEN v. TALBOT

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 4, 2021

Keeylen signed his amended complaint under penalty of perjury, he does not have first-hand knowledge to qualify him to testify as to these facts. Second, Mr. … Given this outcome, the State Defendants’ qualify immunity defense need not be considered. See dkt. 349 at 14-16. IV.

SCHULTZ v. INDIANA UNIVERSITY HEALTH, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 5, 2025

The first two elements are clearly alleged and do not warrant further discussion. … To establish a prima facie case for failure to accommodate, "'a plaintiff must show that: (1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) the employer was aware of his disability; and (3) the employer failed to

Jackson v. Verizon Wireless

676 F. Supp. 2d 728 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 28, 2009

But if it is clear that a plaintiff will be unable to satisfy the legal requirements necessary to establish his or her case, summary judgment is not only appropriate, but mandated. … Jackson would not have been chosen because he was not the most qualified applicant. See Shipley, 874 F.Supp. at 942 .

HOOTEN

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 4, 2026

Dart, 664 F.3d 178, 181 (7th Cir. 2011) ("[A] general risk of violence in a maximum security unit does not by itself establish knowledge of a substantial risk of harm."). … Hooten's favor as to the merits of his claims, it need not address the qualified immunity defense.

LEWIS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 3, 2026

Dismissal for “factual frivolousness” is appropriate where the facts alleged are “clearly baseless,” “fanciful,” “fantastic,” or “delusional.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32–33 (1992). … Plaintiff shall have through April 23, 2026, to SHOW CAUSE why final judgment should not issue due to his failure to establish a basis for the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.

Marshall v. Wellcraft Marine, Inc.

103 F. Supp. 2d 1099 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 4, 1999

Second, we ask whether the general character of the activity giving rise to the incident establishes a “substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity.” Id. … Defendants claim that this alleged injury qualified as “transitory sensations at most, resulting in no appreciable physical harm.” Defs.’ Reply at 6.

Premier-Pabst Sales Co. v. McNutt

17 F. Supp. 708 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 18, 1935

Neither of the plaintiffs thus engaged in the manufacture of alcoholic malt beverages has a brewery or manufacturing establishment within the state. The defendants Paul V. … McNutt and Philip Lutz, Jr., are the duly elected, qualified, and acting Governor and Attorney General, respectively, of the State of Indiana, and the defendant Paul P.

BOYKINS v. GRIFFITH

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

Boykins' right not to have non-medical personnel deny, delay, or otherwise interfere with his medical treatment is a clearly established right, see Burks, 555 F.3d at 595, the State Defendants are not entitled to qualified … immunity.

SWEET v. TOWN OF BARGERSVILLE

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

In addition, the Defendants argue entitlement to qualified immunity. … She acknowledges that she has the initial burden to produce prima facie evidence of being a member of a protected class, being qualified for the job from which she was terminated, she was terminated despite being qualified

Barton v. Sullivan

774 F. Supp. 1151 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 29, 1991

The plaintiff’s mother sought to establish that the plaintiff, her unborn child Ryan, was the wage earner’s son. A.R. 74. … by establishing that the insured person contributed to their support".

United States v. Baldwin

959 F. Supp. 1012 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 28, 1997

Owokoniran, 840 F.2d 373, 374 (7th Cir.1987) (noting that the statute “clearly contemplates that the indictment can be the ‘last oecur[ring]’ step, triggering the running of the 70-day period”), accord, United States v. … But if the statute of limitations has run in the meantime, dismissal without prejudice would have the same practical effect as dismissal with prejudice — immunity from criminal liability.

Pisek v. Kindred Healthcare, Inc. Disability Insurance Plan

633 F. Supp. 2d 659 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 17, 2007

In this case, the SPD, which Plaintiff possessed at all times relevant to this litigation, clearly states that the plan administrator is Kindred but that the claims are administered by MetLife, and it provides addresses for … Plaintiff also seeks attorney’s fees on the issue of whether he qualified for the 24-month limitation exception.

TAYLOR v. MARION COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 3, 2019

Even assuming, arguendo, MCSO is not immune, Taylor still must present evidence that MCSO failed to train or supervise its employees. … Clearly, Hall cannot be held liable for Plaintiffs state law claims. This would be true even if his behavior was egregious.” (Internal citation omitted)).

DOE v. INDIANA UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 31, 2020

A party can also support a fact by showing that the materials cited do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute or that the adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact. … It states: 2 The Court notes that its Practices and Procedures clearly set forth in Appendix A how to cite to exhibits in a brief. [Filing No. 7.]

TURNER v. DEMAREE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 11, 2021

Demaree contends that his use of force was objectively reasonable, he was not involved in providing medical treatment to Turner, and he is entitled to qualified immunity. A. … City of Chicago, 2 Because the Court has found that Demaree's use of force was not unreasonable, the Court need not address his qualified immunity argument. 656 F.3d 523, 530

WEST v. PRETORIUS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 5, 2024

Qualified Immunity Because the Court has found as a matter of law that Defendants did not violate Mr. … Johnson's constitutional rights, the Court need not address their qualified immunity argument. Sparing v.