Case law

Buchman v. State

59 Ind. 1 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1877

These cases go far to establish the position contended for by the appellant. … This clearly implies that he is to be paid his customary fees for an opinión, and that he may demand payment before delivering his evidence.

Grubbs v. Morris

103 Ind. 166 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 8, 1885

It places the trustee, or assignee, under the control and supervision of the courts, and the property is, in a qualified sense at least, *168 in tlie custody of the law.. … Ch. 565 , Chancellor Kent very strongly censures the rule and clearly demonstrates its injustice, and many other courts have expressed similar views. Cunningham v. Freeborn, 11 Wend. 240 , vide p. 256; Burd v.

Reid v. Indianapolis Osteopathic Medical Hospital, Inc.

709 F. Supp. 853 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 13, 1989

The plaintiff counters by arguing that section 1395dd establishes federal question jurisdiction over claims of patient dumping. … Because the defendant conceded at oral argument that the Indiana medical malpractice statute establishes a negligence standard, Mr.

Hiland v. Hiland

467 N.E.2d 1253 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 1984

establish that he provided more for the support of such child during the calendar year than the parent not having custody. … To qualify for tax exemptions under subsection B, the noneus-todial parent must pay at least twelve hundred dollars ($1200.00) per year per child; this is sufficient only if the custodial parent failed to show that he provided

Moore v. American Nat. Bank at Indianapolis

114 Ind. App. 551 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 1944

“It is an established principle of our law, that a party cannot prosecute an appeal, and thereby seek to reverse a judgment, the benefits of which he has voluntarily and knowingly accepted. … powerless to proceed legally because it was without a qualified judge through whom to act.

State Board of Tax Commissioners v. New Energy Co.

585 N.E.2d 38 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 27, 1992

Clearly, the legislature could have provided a similar statute for deductions, but it did not do so. … This Court would note that the effective date of IND.CODE § 33-3-5-1, the statute establishing the Indiana tax court, was July 1, 1986.

Wagle v. Henry

679 N.E.2d 1002 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 22, 1997

Trial Rule 12(C) is proper only when there are no genuine issues of material fact and the facts shown by the pleadings clearly entitle the movant to judgment. Bell v. … Rose agreed at the hearing to allow blood tests on the child to establish Wagle’s paternity.

Leslie v. St. Vincent New Hope, Inc.

916 F. Supp. 879 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 7, 1996

Finally, New Hope argues that Leslie has failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge. … Qualified Individual with a Disability To establish a prima facie ease of discrimination under the ADA, Leslie must also show that she is a “qualified individual with a disability.”

Lane v. State

521 N.E.2d 947 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1988

This Court found the evidence sufficient to establish Lane's identity as the robber. … Lane's allegation of ineffective assistance is clearly an attempt to cireum-vent Rule PC 1, section 8, in order to present evidence on issues that had been waived.

State Ex Rel. Mta v. Ind. Rev. Bd.

144 Ind. App. 63 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 31, 1968

It is, therefore, clearly established that the Governor did, in fact, accept this group of House Enrolled Acts, including No. 1818, the one in question. … SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.

Clem v. United States

601 F. Supp. 835 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 29, 1985

. § 1346 (b), 2671 et seq., constitutes a limited waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity. United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 399 , 96 S.Ct. 948, 953 , 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976); United States v. … In the case presently before the court, the evidence clearly establishes that the Clems were swimming in Lake Michigan in an area adjacent to Mt. Baldy beach at the time of the incident.

Lafary v. Kindred

862 N.E.2d 686 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 12, 2007

The Lafarys could overcome the presumption in favor of the Kindreds by establishing the Kindreds’ unfitness or acquiescence or by demonstrating that a strong emotional bond had formed between J.K. and the Lafarys, but the … We conclude that the trial court’s termination of the guardianship is not clearly erroneous.

American States Insurance v. State ex rel. Jennings

152 Ind. App. 422 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 1972

E. 2d 383 , said: “* * * It is only when the supporting affidavits clearly establish that there is no controversy as to any material fact that summary judgment can be granted. [Citing cases.] … We are of the opinion that the affidavit filed by the appellant, American States Insurance Company, in response to the affidavit filed in support of the motion for summary judgment by relator-appellee Jennings, clearly and

L.M. Zeller, Individually, and D/B/A Zeller Elevator Company, LEO Mark Zeller, Louis M. Zeller III, Andrew M. Boeglin, and Matthew Boeglin v. Indiana Fire Prevention (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2016

A plain reading of the statue [sic] through the use of the past tense phrase “have been,” clearly requires that the approval for the training should come before it can be qualified for CE. … Words must be given their plain, ordinary and usual meaning, unless a contrary purpose is clearly shown by the statute. Id.

Near East Side Community Organization v. Hair

555 N.E.2d 1324 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 1990

Wood, supra, we noted that a qualified privilege is lost if the defendant does not *1331 believe what he says, or if the defendant is reckless because no reason or policy "can be found for conferring immunity upon the foolish … The First Amendment does not offer absolute immunity for libelous and damaging falsehoods. McDonald v.

Donaldson v. Indianapolis Public Transportation Corp.

632 N.E.2d 1167 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 1994

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining that a witness offered as an expert was not qualified to testify. 2. … While the offer was sufficient to establish the relevancy of Mott's testimony, it was not sufficient to establish the materiality thereof,.

Miller Pipeline Corp. v. British Gas PLC

69 F. Supp. 2d 1129 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 27, 1999

This claim language of the ’302 patent clearly describes slitting or cutting an existing pipe in half, rather than breaking the pipe into irregular fragments. While Dr. … However, this motion addresses only Miller Pipeline’s antitrust claim under the Sherman Act and so we will address facts relating to the patent infringement claims and defenses only to the extent necessary to establish a

Tabor v. Employee Benefits Committee (In Re Cress)

121 B.R. 1006 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 15, 1990

The Plan was first established in 1956 and restated effective January 1, 1990. … ERISA qualified plans are not on its illustrative list of property interests that qualify for exemptions.

Lamar Allen Colley v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 7, 2015

Garrett’s statements to Officer Tyler therefore qualified as excited utterances. … To rebut that presumption, the defendant “must establish from the judge’s conduct actual bias or prejudice that places the defendant in jeopardy.” Id. at 823.

Robbins v. Spencer

140 Ind. 483 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1894

The positive evidence clearly establishes the execution and delivery of the deed of Eliza Robbins to appellant and his brother, William M. Robbins. … Clearly that case has no application to the case at bar. The next case they cite is Brown, Admr., v. Kenyon, 108 Ind. 288 .