Case law

Sandra S. Weaver v. Elkhart Community School Corporation

95 N.E.3d 97 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 2018

a contractual relationship—sounds in tort: “In contrast to a breach of contract claim, which does not necessarily involve intentional wrongdoing, a claim of intentional interference with contract is established … So, while we express no opinion on the merits of any of Weaver’s claims, they are clearly all torts, as she alleges violations of 1 We shall assume, without deciding, that ECS qualifies as an “

Herx v. Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend Inc.

48 F. Supp. 3d 1168 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 3, 2014

To the contrary, the analysis pertaining to § 702 states clearly that “[s]uch organizations remain subject to the provisions of Title VII with regard to race, color, sex or national origin.” Rayburn v. … 676 F.2d 1272, 1279 (9th Cir.1982) (“The legislative history of this exemption shows that although Congress permitted religious organizations to discriminate in favor of members of their faith, religious employers are not immune

State of Indiana v. Kinshasha Johnson

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 2025

The charging information and supporting judicial records clearly alleged the required facts. … Further, “‘it is well established that vagueness challenges to statutes which do not involve First Amendment freedoms must be examined in the light of the facts of the case at

City of Aurora v. West

22 Ind. 88 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 15, 1864

On the second argument, Lord Mansfield said: “ The general rule established ex comitate et jure gentium is, that the place where the contract is made, and not where the action is brought, is to be considered in expounding … Clearly, therefore, the law of England must be the rule, as the money was made payable here.” To the same effect in Indiana. The State Bank v. Bowers, 8 Blackf. 72 ; Hunt v. Standart, 15 Ind. 33 : Rose et al. v.

Strack v. Holcomb

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 11, 2020

Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless “(1) the plaintiffs adequately alleged facts that, if true, would constitute a violation of a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was ‘clearly … established’ at the time of the alleged violation, such that a reasonable public official would have known his conduct was unlawful.”

Sue Yee Lee Ex Rel. Kwei Hwang Lee v. Lafayette Home Hospital, Inc.

78 Ind. Dec. 503 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 29, 1980

Such affidavits also attested that each of the defendants was a qualified health care provider under the act. … Provision is made for the establishment of medical review panels to review all proposed malpractice complaints against health care providers covered by this article.

Klein v. Mele

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 21, 2022

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … In certain instances where the law is clearly established, an officer’s reliance on the advice of counsel may entitle the officer to qualified immunity as an exception to the lack of immunity based on “extraordinary circumstances

Anonymous Hospital v. Mason Spencer and Steve Robertson, Commissioner of The Indiana Dept. of Insurance, and Doug Hill, Medical Review Panel Chair

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 8, 2020

Before a plaintiff may pursue a malpractice complaint in court against a qualified healthcare provider, the Act requires the plaintiff to present a proposed complaint to an MRP, and the MRP must give … Specifically, the Helms court held that a healthcare facility could be “vicariously liable for the acts of its apparent agents even if the agents are individually immune from suit.” Id. at 312.

Brookins v. Indianapolis Power & Light Co.

90 F. Supp. 2d 993 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 10, 2000

Qualified Individual with a Disability In order to succeed in making an ADA reasonable accommodation claim, a plaintiff must establish first that he was “a qualified individual with a disability.” Id. … Corp., 101 F.3d 519 , 525 (7th Cir.1996) (“Recovery under the ADA also requires a plaintiff to establish she is a qualified individual with a disability.”)).

Department of Revenue v. Kimball International, Inc.

520 N.E.2d 454 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 21, 1988

The taxpayer has the burden of establishing qualification under the strict terms of the exemption. … The trial court in this case found that the evidence as introduced by Kimball established an entitlement to the exemption.

Whiteco Industries, Inc. v. Kopani

514 N.E.2d 840 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 5, 1987

We believe that the law of this state clearly defines the avoidance of "injustice" more narrowly than the drafters of the restatement envisioned. … For example, in Romack would the officer have been uniquely qualified to act simply as a security guard?

Basham v. State

422 N.E.2d 1206 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1981

Such evidence clearly supports the ruling of the trial court. See Jackson, 411 N.E.2d at 611 ; Feller v. State, (1976) 264 Ind. 541, 544-45 , 348 N.E.2d 8, 12-13 . … ISSUE V Defendant submits that it is unconstitutional to place the burden of establishing insanity upon him.

Trump Indiana, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

790 N.E.2d 192 · Indiana Tax Court · Jun 16, 2003

Tax Ct.2000) (holding that to qualify for the exemption, the movement, transportation, or carrying must be for consideration), review denied. … The Department, on the other hand, argues that the penalty is warranted because Trump failed to pay sales or use tax on items clearly subject to those taxes.

In re the Supervised Estate of Gary Roberts, Martha Blevins, and In re the Supervised Estate of Elizabeth A. Roberts, Martha Blevins

27 N.E.3d 1136 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2015

On appeal, Blevins argues that the Estates failed to establish each of the necessary elements. … N.D.Ga. 1994) (gun used for personal protection qualified as household goods under federal law).

Wenzel v. Hopper & Galliher, P.C.

779 N.E.2d 30 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 2002

The Judgment will be reversed if it is clearly erroneous. Id. Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when the record lacks any evidence or reasonable inferences from the evidence to support them. Id. … A "qualified person" under the Act is an individual "that is eligible under this article to own shares issued by a professional corporation." Ind.Code § 23-1.5-1-12.

Newman v. JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ASSN.

875 N.E.2d 729 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2007

As our Supreme Court held in Trail, “merely making [ ] an accusation does not establish a [defamation] claim sufficiently to permit courts to determine its legal legitimacy. … In order to defeat summary judgment, the burden is on Newman to establish that the qualified privilege was abused. Cortez v. Jo-Ann Stores, Inc., 827 N.E.2d 1223, 1234 (Ind.Ct.App.2005).

Morrison v. McMahon

475 N.E.2d 1174 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 1985

The moving party has the burden of establishing that no material facts are in genuine issue. All doubts and inferences are resolved in favor of the non-moving party. … Since Morrison's tenure at the Frankfort Sewage Treatment Facility extended from 1977-1982, he is clearly "covered" by this statute.

Town of St. John v. State Board of Tax Commissioners

730 N.E.2d 240 · Indiana Tax Court · Jun 16, 2000

Third, Mon-trust’s litigation has clearly benefited a large class: all Montana citizens interested in Montana’s public schools.... … The Indiana Tort Claims Act [ITCA], Ind.Code Ann, §§ 34-13-3-1 to 25 (West 1999), was enacted as a response to the Campbell opinion and "established extensive immunity provisions which shield governmental units from [tort

Steve Snyder, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Kimberly Snyder v. Prompt Medical Transportation, Inc. Humana Insurance Company and St. Joseph Regional Medical Center

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2019

and SJRMC sought to have the order certified for interlocutory appeal, but this Court denied those requests. 1 Humana did not participate in the medical review panel process because it was not a qualified … The current version of the statute clearly shows that Congress intended to preempt a broad swath of state laws and regulations with Part C.

Hudson v. City of Terre Haute

88 Ind. App. 454 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 11, 1929

Appellee contends that in establishing safety zones and maintaining the markers in the street, it was exercising a governmental function; that it is immune from liability for damages arising from *456 the exercise of such … In discussing the subject, the court said: “It is clearly within the power of the commissioners to establish safety zones for protection of the public in entering and alighting from street cars, as well as in waiting for