Case law

Quadir Quiroz v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 23, 2025

The State responded by granting him use immunity. … Here, the State clearly established that Logan did not remember or professed not to remember the material portion of the subject matter of his statement and that Logan’s silence was brought about by

State ex rel. McGregor v. Cooprider

96 Ind. 279 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1884

We are of opinion that the court clearly erred in sustaining the appellee’s demurrer to each paragraph of the alternative writ of mandate. … It was shown by the relator, in each paragraph of the alternative writ, that he had established the validity of his claim against Harrison School Township, of which township the appellee was the trustee, by the judgment of

In Re Adoption of DC

928 N.E.2d 602 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 9, 2010

We will set aside the findings or judgment only if they are clearly erroneous. Id. … There is no evidence of an allotment or garnishment established to benefit D.C.

STEVENS v. POOR

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 1, 2024

"[Q]ualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct 'does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.'" … "To overcome the defendant's invocation of qualified immunity, [a plaintiff] must show both (1) that the facts make out a constitutional violation, and (2) that the constitutional right was 'clearly established' at the

VanDalsen v. Roswarksi

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 8, 2024

And if she did, the defendants would be entitled to qualified immunity on her claim, because any such right was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violations. … established,” such that the defendants could be held liable for money damages under the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Collins v. State

192 Ind. 86 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1921

D. 1918, duly qualified and gave bond, and then and there duly entered upon the discharge of the duties of his said office as the successor of said Cecil B. … The statute now makes the act of omission the conversion, and the crime is established by proving a failure to pay over.

MCCALISTER v. STEVENS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2019

“Qualified immunity protects officers performing discretionary functions from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights that a reasonable person would … The right to be free from arrests unsupported by probable cause has long been clearly established. Id. at 250; Humphrey v. Staszak, 148 F.3d 719, 725 (7th Cir. 1998).

Department of Financial Institutions, State of Indiana v. Michael Massey

20 N.E.3d 853 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 2014

The ALJ found that the DFI had correctly concluded that Massey’s armed robbery conviction qualified as a crime of dishonesty. … seeking judicial relief has been prejudiced by an agency action that is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity

McNeil v. Indiana Parole Dept

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 23, 2021

Officer Griffin alternatively argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. “Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are liable for civil damages . . . … In evaluating a qualified immunity defense at summary judgment, the court considers (1) whether the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, show that the official violated a clearly established right

HAWKINS v. KNIGHT

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

Qualified Immunity Finally, both Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … "To overcome the defendant’s invocation of qualified immunity, [a plaintiff] must show both (1) that the facts make out a constitutional violation, and (2) that the constitutional right was 'clearly established' at the

State Dept. of Rev., Inher. Tax D. v. Estate of Powell

165 Ind. App. 482 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 1975

Powell was a qualified member of the Plan at his death. The Plan was established to supplement Social Security payments and the benefits of a previously established “Plan A.” … The stated purpose of the Plan was to establish a qualified annuity.

Mario Deon Watkins v. State of Indiana

67 N.E.3d 1092 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 6, 2017

Indeed, the Indiana Constitution was adopted to the end that “justice be established, public order maintained, and liberty - perpetuated.” Ind. Const, preamble. … Bolin, 795 F.3d 726 (7th Cir.2015) (police officers are not shielded from liability by qualified immunity when their execution of a search warrant was unreasonable), cer t. denied — U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 1162 , 194 L.Ed.2d 175

JONES

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 20, 2026

When presented with a qualified immunity defense, the court must first “(1) determine whether the plaintiff has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and (2) if so, determine whether that right was clearly … Although qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, the burden of defeating an assertion of qualified immunity rests with the plaintiff. Id. (citing Spiegel v. Cortese, 196 F.3d 717 (7th Cir.1999)).

Gary II LLC v. Lake County Assessor

Indiana Tax Court · Mar 13, 2025

Court reverses a final determination of the Indiana Board only when it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Moreover, because it is evidence that is sufficient to establish a given fact, it remains sufficient to establish that fact if it is not rebutted.

J.C. v. J.C.

928 N.E.2d 602 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 9, 2010

We will set aside the findings or judgment only if they are clearly erroncous. Id. … There is no evidence of an allotment or garnishment established to benefit D.C.

Stacey H. Young v, Michael A. Young (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 2017

The primary issue mediated by PC Durnell focused on the Child’s immunizations. As a chiropractor, Mother “has long been opposed to immunizations.” (Appellant’s App. Vol. II, p. 69). … Father was responsible for taking the Child to the immunization appointments, while Mother would be permitted to attend.

Hartsell v. Dietz

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2023

“To overcome a defendant’s invocation of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged … Hartsell’s clearly established right. See Green, 868 F.3d at 633. As a result, the ultimate decision on Defendants’ qualified immunity defense depends on and cannot be separated from factual disputes regarding Mr.

Lowder v. Marshall County Sheriff's Department

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 5, 2025

The defense of qualified immunity “shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … That then leaves only the question of qualified immunity for Officer Tapia, and in particular whether the constitutional right here was clearly established. See McGee, 55 F.4th at 572- 73.

Lora Hoagland v. Franklin Township Community School Corporation

10 N.E.3d 1034 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 2014

First, we determine whether the legislature has spoken clearly and unambiguously in the statute. Id. … constitutional claims based on 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 5 For this reason we need not consider whether Hoagland complied with the ITCA’s provisions. 9  immunity

Foo v. Trustees of Indiana University

88 F. Supp. 2d 937 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 28, 1999

Qualified immunity protects government officials who are performing discretionary functions from liabil *966 ity for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Whether the State Defendants will be protected by qualified immunity ‘turns on the objective legal reasonableness of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were “clearly established” at the time it was taken