Case law

FELDER v. STAFFING INDUSTRY ANALYSTS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 2, 2023

better qualified for the position at issue." … The evidence adduced by Defendant establishes that during the interview process Mr. Holland and Ms.

GOLLIDAY v. WELLS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 7, 2025

As a practical matter, there are not enough lawyers willing and qualified to accept a pro bono assignment in every pro se case. See Olson v. … He clearly can write and understand English at a high level. Furthermore, this case is at a very early stage, with the Court just now screening Mr. Golliday's original complaint.

Bandemer v. Davis

603 F. Supp. 1479 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 13, 1984

The Bandemer plaintiffs clearly belong to a politically salient class, those who align themselves with the Democratic Party. … These minor deviations clearly pass muster under article I, section 2. Brown v.

SCHROCK v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (IDOC)

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

Schrock discusses it in his briefing, any Monell claim against IDOC was dismissed at screening because the IDOC is immune to damages under the Eleventh Amendment. … Schrock has not established that he has a disability that substantially limits a major life activity.

MANN v. DANIELS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 2, 2020

Warden Daniels also contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … clearly constitutes serious harm.").

Templeton Coal Co., Inc. v. Shalala

882 F. Supp. 799 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 4, 1995

of a due process violation to establish that the legislature has acted in an arbitrary and irrational way. … In return, such operators benefitted from the existence of a qualified work force.

VANDERPOOL v. CAPITAL ACCOUNTS LLC

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 11, 2024

If a petitioner cannot establish one of the Strickland prongs, the court need not consider the other. Groves v. United States, 755 F.3d 588, 591 (7th Cir. 2014). … The plea agreement clearly states that, because of his prior Indiana robbery conviction, he was subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment under 21 U.S.C. § 851 and that he was a career offender under

Simon Property Group L.P. v. mySimon, Inc.

194 F.R.D. 644 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 20, 2000

At least prior to the inadvertent disclosure of the documents to Elsten, the documents certainly qualified for protection under both the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product privilege, including the core … Although the court’s discussion of inadvertent disclosures was dicta, it clearly was also considered and thoughtful dicta that is instructive here.

CLEPHANE v. United States

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 11, 2024

If a petitioner cannot establish one of the Strickland prongs, the court need not consider the other. Groves v. United States, 755 F.3d 588, 591 (7th Cir. 2014). … The plea agreement clearly states that, because of his prior Indiana robbery conviction, he was subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment under 21 U.S.C. § 851 and that he was a career offender under

TAYLOR v. DIENHART

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 8, 2023

immunity grounds. … It is well-established that "the ultimate touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is 'reasonableness,'" Brigham City v.

Celebration International, Inc. v. Chosun International, Inc.

234 F. Supp. 2d 905 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 12, 2002

Costumes, like clothing garments, clearly have a utilitarian aspect because they cover the wearer’s body and protect the wearer from the elements. … Thus, Celebration has failed to establish a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits.

Midwestern Indemnity Co. v. Laikin

119 F. Supp. 2d 831 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 16, 2000

Midwestern would not even qualify for the protection the Texas court provided the insurer in Gandy , however, because Midwestern did not provide a defense to its (putative) insureds. 6 . … Barnes, 603 N.E.2d 1337 (Ind.1992) (established precedents gave parents immunity in personal injury actions by minor children against their parents, but court recognized new exception when action is based on claim of intentional

CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. ZAYO GROUP LLC

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

The easement and statute of limitations issues are not controlling in the way typical interlocutory appeal issues are – such as qualified immunity, whose resolution affects whether litigation against a particular party … Hinrichs' attendance relates to CSXT's prior settlement positions and its "post-summary judgment litigation positions," and that "the record evidence establishes that these statements are clearly erroneous and do not justify

JOHNSON v. WATSON

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 29, 2021

Thus, even if he could establish that he no longer qualifies as a career offender under § 4B1.1, he cannot establish a miscarriage of justice that would allow his § 2241 petition to proceed under the savings clause. … Section 333.7401 clearly prohibits conduct "relating to narcotic drugs." 21 U.S.C. § 804(22). The term "narcotic drugs" includes "cocaine, its salts, stereoisomers, and salts of stereoisomers . . .," Mich.

PHILLIPS

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

Phillips's Eighth Amendment rights; and (2) they are entitled to qualified immunity. Dkt. 52. 1. … In short, a plaintiff must establish an objective and subjective component. Giles v. Godinez, 914 F.3d 1040, 1051 (7th Cir. 2019).

HALL v. GASKINS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 29, 2024

Second, the Seventh Circuit has clearly indicated that a prisoner has no property or liberty interest in prison employment. See, e.g., Wallace v. … Blackard, 2 F.4th 716, 721 (7th Cir. 2021) (noting that a prisoner's exposure to human waste in cell is sufficient to establish unsanitary conditions under the Eighth Amendment).

COUNCIL v. GARLAND

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 14, 2023

When screening a complaint, the Court must dismiss any portion that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … It is well-established that psychiatric conditions and psychological distress may qualify as serious medical conditions for purposes of the Eighth Amendment. E.g., Antonelli v.

Lycan v. Walters

904 F. Supp. 884 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 11, 1995

More importantly, Plaintiffs have failed to show that any statement in the Letter of Intent qualifies as an actionable misrepresentation. … Supreme Court and Seventh Circuit precedent clearly establish that mere silence does not violate § 10(b) or Rule 10b-5 unless there exists some duty to speak. Chiarella, 445 U.S. at 235 , 100 S.Ct. at 1118 .

Adams v. Indiana Bell Telephone Co., Inc.

2 F. Supp. 2d 1077 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 23, 1998

A trial court, however, clearly has discretion to grant a well-taken motion to strike. Mirshak v. Joyce, 652 F.Supp. 359, 370 (N.D.Ill.1987). … According to plaintiffs, "[e]ven within CRESP groups, there is a clearly discemable pattern of age discrimination.” Pis. Mem. In Oppos. To Mot. To Strike at 12.

Manzon v. Stant Corp.

202 F. Supp. 2d 851 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 17, 2002

Stant cannot rely on Malone’s approval of Deloitte & Touche’s determination because Malone’s approval of the independent auditor’s work is qualified at best. … As explained in the discussion of section 4(c) above, for certain benefits, the contract clearly requires payments to have been made “within five (5) business days after the Termination Date,” meaning that Manzon should have