Case law

Stepp v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division

521 N.E.2d 350 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1988

In a discharge case, the burden of establishing just cause initially rests with the employer. … She was clearly required to perform a task which she refused to do. The evidence most favorable to the Laboratory reveals no waiver occurred. The Review Board is in all things affirmed.

State v. Person

699 N.E.2d 783 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 1998

A second Speedway police officer testified that Person admitted he had obtained the money from a “pea-shake house,” apparently a gambling establishment. … We are not persuaded that our well-established precedent immunizing these governmental entities from the assessment of punitive attorney’s fees should be reversed when there is no specific statutory provision authorizing

Rogers v. Calumet National Bank

213 Ind. 576 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1938

That *581 since this action is prosecuted under the Declaratory Judgments Act, and, not by way of quo loarranto, the title to the offices was not in issue, and that it was sufficient for the members of the new board to establish … It appears from the stipulation joined in by all the parties that the members of the new board “were duly qualified as provided by law and each qualified according to Senate Bill 176 of the Acts of the General Assembly of

VanDalsen v. Roswarksi

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 15, 2023

A related principle is the doctrine of qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law. . . .

In Re the Wardship of B. C.

433 N.E.2d 19 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 1982

When a child is removed from its family and the parent-child relationship is terminated, “all rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations (including any rights to custody, control, visitation, or support … therefore, L.C. argues that the finding was not supported by sufficient evidence of probative value. 4 When reviewing a case in which the judge has rendered findings of fact, we will not set aside the judgment unless it is clearly

GEESY

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 24, 2026

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from individual liability so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Luna, 577 U.S. 7, 11 (2015) and they are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission v. Spirited Sales, LLC

79 N.E.3d 371 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jul 21, 2017

In addition to our well-established statutory interpretation precedent, Indiana’s alcohol statutes provide additional interpretive guidance. … The denial does not violate Indiana’s Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause.

Strickler v. McCord

306 F. Supp. 2d 818 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 17, 2004

He must first establish knowledge before getting to the appropriateness *827 of the Defendants’ response, or whether they are entitled to qualified immunity. … of the obviousness of the risk, it is unnecessary to get to the appropriateness of the defendants’ response, or whether they are entitled to qualified immunity.

RHYME

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 9, 2025

Rhyme bears the burden of overcoming Deputy Polley's qualified immunity defense by establishing that: (1) Deputy Polley violated the Fourth Amendment by using a taser on Mr. … Deputy Polley is therefore entitled to qualified immunity on Mr.

Cheryl L. Underwood v. Thomas Bunger, in his capacity as the Personal Representative of The Estate of Kenneth K. Kinney Judith M. Fulford and Sheree Demming

52 N.E.3d 829 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 2016

Our Supreme Court determined that the phrase “in joint tenancy” clearly overcame the presumption in favor of tenancies by the entirety and gave the spouses a joint tenancy in the property. Id. … Ramer, 896 N.E.2d at 569 (the phrase “as joint tenants” sufficient to establish joint tenancy among four couples rather than two estates by the entireties).

Richard Prancik, b/n/f, Renee Prancik v. Oak Hill United School Corporation

997 N.E.2d 401 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2013

Under these circumstances, the court held that “school personnel here clearly exercised ordinary and reasonable care for the safety of the children under their authority.” … The majority of the opinion addressed whether the school enjoyed immunity from the student’s claims under the Indiana Torts Claim Act, with the court holding that it did not. Id. at 484.

COMBS v. ELIS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 8, 2025

"A public official is entitled to qualified immunity from suit unless he [or she] violated a clearly established constitutional right." Dockery v. … that right was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct."

Brett Carney v. Fernando Patino, Jr.

114 N.E.3d 20 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2018

Carney claims that on that date, he encountered Patino and his father at the Residence, and that he observed two pickup trucks in the driveway loaded with various fixtures that had clearly been taken out of … [25] Carney essentially suggests that his abuse of the qualified privilege could not be established absent direct testimony from him admitting that his statements to law enforcement were in fact motivated

Community Pharmacies of Indiana, Inc. v. Indiana Family & Social Services Administration

801 F. Supp. 2d 802 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 8, 2011

A preliminary injunction is “an exercise of a very far-reaching power, never to be indulged in except in a case clearly demanding it.” Roland Mach. Co. v. … White, 941 F.2d 201 , 215 (3d Cir.1991) (“As to the inadequacy of legal remedies, the Eleventh Amendment bar to an award of retroactive damages against the [state] clearly establishes that any legal remedy is unavailable

Title Search Co., Inc. v. 1st Source Bank

765 N.E.2d 167 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 2002

The case before us is, however, clearly distinguishable from Borgman. In Borg-man, the plaintiffs brought proceedings supplemental in an Indiana court based upon a judgment rendered by a federal court. … We also note that Title Search has not established that it was in any way damaged by the Bank's actions.

In the Matter of: J.D. and J.G., Children in Need of Services, J.G. (Father) and K.M. (Mother) v. Ind. Dept. of Child Services, and Child Advocates, Inc. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 2015

Mother had failed to take J.G. to scheduled medical appointments, J.G.’s immunizations were not current, and she had a flat spot on her head, a possible indicator of abuse. … We reverse only upon a showing that the decision of the [juvenile] court was clearly erroneous. Id.

Powers v. Gastineau

568 N.E.2d 1020 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 1991

Consequently, plaintiff overcame the qualified privilege, and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict. … Clearly, defendant's efforts went beyond what was necessary; however, any malice on defendant's part resulted from overzea-lousness or other noniniquitous human failing and was not so obdurate as to require punishment for

GARCIA v. VANIHEL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 27, 2025

"To overcome the defendant’s invocation of qualified immunity, [Mr. … Garcia does not address qualified immunity and points to no law clearly establishing that it would violate his constitutional rights to place him in an upper range cell when medical staff have confirmed that his medical

Wittenberg Lutheran Village Endowment Corp. v. Lake County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals

782 N.E.2d 483 · Indiana Tax Court · Jan 24, 2003

The sole issue for this Court to decide is whether the portion of Wittenberg's retirement community known as the "Villas" qualifies for a charitable exemption under Indiana Code § 6-1.1-10-16. … Qualified nurses [aides] or L.P.N.s are on staff to assist residents with their medications and provide other minor medical testing and assistance.

Indiana Department of Transportation v. Howard

879 N.E.2d 1119 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 28, 2008

INDOT then filed a petition for rehearing in which it clearly states the basis on which it invokes this court’s jurisdiction. 1 We grant the petition for rehearing, vacate our earlier decision, and consider the merits of … Clay County filed a motion for summary judgment, alleging governmental immunity. The trial court granted Clay County’s motion, and Shand Mining appealed.