Case law

Brown v. State

468 N.E.2d 841 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1984

In sum the support marshalled for the appellate claim of insufficiency of evidence merely asks this court to substitute a different complex of factual inferences for those inferences qualifying as reasonable inferences supporting … The evidence of identity was clearly sufficient. *843 2.

Matter of Gifford

93 B.R. 636 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 7, 1988

This holding “is consistent with the well established principle that the bankruptcy estate inures to whatever rights the debtor had at the time the petition was filed.” … The principle is now so firmly established, however, that it must be followed and applied.

Rumler v. Hyatte

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 23, 2024

Next, the court considers the defendants’ argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Generally, government officials are protected from civil liability when performing discretionary functions under the doctrine of qualified immunity so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Pickett v. Kolb

142 Ind. App. 78 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 1967

On the basis I don’t think there is enough qualification, qualifying evidence here to show that this man is qualified at the present time to give an estimate of the speed when there are skid marks; there are so many variable … It has been held by the Supreme Court of Indiana that the exclusion of evidence is harmless where the facts sought to be established by such evidence were established by other evidence. Boxell v. Bright Nat.

Commissioner, Department of Revenue v. Fort

760 N.E.2d 1103 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 14, 2002

One such regulation provides that a person is physically qualified to drive a commercial vehicle if that person has "no established history or clinical diagnosis of rheumatic, arthritic, orthopedic, muscular, neuromuscular … Nothing in the record establishes or even suggests that the 1988 report has any continuing scientific validity.

Community Hospitals of Indianapolis, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc., Neuro Division

594 N.E.2d 448 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 1992

The Quality Assurance Council therefore qualifies as a "peer review committee" under the statute. All communications to a peer review committee shall be privileged communications. … IC. 84-4-12.6-2(a) The party which seeks to avoid discovery has the burden to establish the essential elements of the privilege being invoked. Ray v. St.

Larry G. Jones and Sharon F. Jones v. Jefferson County Assessor

51 N.E.3d 461 · Indiana Tax Court · May 4, 2016

On July 17, 2013, the Indiana Board issued a final determination finding that the parties’ evidentiary presentations had established that the Joneses’ residence was assessed as if it were 100% complete during the years … at issue when clearly it was not.

Minnick v. State

154 Ind. 379 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 28, 1900

These provisions of our fundamental and statutory law clearly show that a public official is not authorized to enter upon the discharge of the duties of the office to which he may have been elected or appointed until he has … steps to qualify.

Weenig v. Wood

169 Ind. App. 413 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 21, 1976

There was evidence before the jury which established that Weenig published many of the defamations in Indiana. … While the thrust of this qualified privilege is clearly of common law origins, see, e.g., Prosser, supra, at 789, Weenig attempts to raise for the first time in his reply brief the contention that his statements were protected

State ex rel. Harrison v. Menaugh

43 L.R.A. 408 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1898

clearly his charge to the exclusion of all such doubts. … If we can add to the reserved rights of the people, we can take them away; if we can mend, we can mar; if we can remove the landmarks which we find established, we can obliterate them; if we can change the constitution in

Mitchell v. State

712 N.E.2d 1050 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 1999

State, 600 N.E.2d 560, 567 (Ind.Ct.App.1992), we held *1055 that when the evidence at trial clearly establishes that the felonies committed by the defendant occurred in the proper sequence, no fundamental error results from … The State’s evidence clearly established that Mitchell’s felonies occurred in the proper sequence. Therefore, we find no fundamental error.

Baker v. Baker

43 Ind. App. 26 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 6, 1909

The rule and exception and principle governing the same are clearly stated in Creighton v. … The rules of this class of evidence are well established, and should not be extended. Such declarations, to be admissible, must be something more than mere general or random statements.

Hammon v. State

809 N.E.2d 945 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 14, 2004

s statement clearly was related to the facts and cireumstances surrounding the startling event and this element is met. … We conclude this choice of words clearly indicates that police "interrogation" is not the same as, and is much narrower than, police "questioning."

Hispanic College Fund, Inc. v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

826 N.E.2d 652 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 2005

In January of 1999, the Division I Board of Directors adopted a proposal to eliminate after the 2002 season the certified preseason games and to establish a twelfth regular season game for those institutions that had a fourteen-week … Only one organization, the Black Coaches Association, qualified. Subsequently HCF and other affected members sought waivers of the rule to allow exempted games in 2002.

Bradley v. Work

916 F. Supp. 1446 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 13, 1996

The Constitutional claims raised by the plaintiffs may be enforced through § 1983, which establishes a remedy for any person who has been deprived of his or her “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution … This Court has already noted that this ''hybrid” system does not fall clearly into either category of appointed judge, or popularly elected judge. See Bradley v. Indiana State Elec.

Kudla v. Hammond City of

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 16, 2022

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages in situations in which their conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.” … “A constitutional right is ‘clearly established’ for qualified-immunity purposes where [t]he contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right

Helton v. State

624 N.E.2d 499 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 1, 1993

Helton’s conduct is clearly proscribed by the Gang Statute. … Helton has not established any error or prejudice. See Shockley v.

Davis v. State

791 N.E.2d 266 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 11, 2003

Specifically, Davis maintains that Kinkade was not a qualified expert witness under Indiana Evidence Rule 702. … Clearly, Kinkade’s testimony gave substance to facts that were otherwise difficult to articulate.

SCUTERI

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

• 1.5 hours on January 9, 2026, to review Eighth Amendment case law on qualified immunity, because the Medical Defendants have not asserted qualified immunity in this lawsuit. … The Court also agrees that it is unreasonable to bill 1.5 hours to research qualified immunity for a reply brief when the Medical Defendants have not—indeed, may not—raise qualified immunity in this case.

Indiana Department of State Revenue v. First Union Bank & Trust Co.

425 N.E.2d 245 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 1981

It was long ago established in Indiana that a devise to a Masonic Lodge is a devise to charitable uses. Cruse et a l. v. Axtell et al. (1875), 50 Ind. 49 . In State Tax Bd. v. … The evidence presented at trial clearly shows that the Lodge and its affiliate organizations engage in religious, educational and charitable activities. The Temple is used as a site for these activities.