Case law

Thomson Inc. n/k/a Technicolor USA, Inc. v. Insurance Company of North America n/k/a Century Indemnity Company, and XL Insurance America

11 N.E.3d 982 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 2014

The injured party can establish some evidence that prejudice did not occur in the particular situation. … How does one “qualify” to be a “Named Insured?” The only logical answer is via the endorsements described.

Smock v. Coots

165 Ind. App. 474 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 1975

That Nichols and Wolfe are personally qualified to own and operate a package liquor store, but Coots is not; 2. … That Coots was personally qualified to hold a liquor store permit. 2 2.

Meinschein v. J. R. Short Milling Co.

157 Ind. App. 53 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 19, 1973

subject matter, unless such law contains *56 an express provision indicating such intention, or unless the terms and provisions of such law are so comprehensive as to completely occupy the field of such subject matter, and clearly … profit corporation or organization located in any such city” are words of limitation expressing a legislative intent that such corporations or organizations are the only allowable lessees, as the city could lease to any qualified

BUCHANAN v. POLICE DEPT.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 18, 2022

Buchanan was objectively reasonable, that they are entitled to qualified immunity, and that Mr. Buchanan did not suffer any damages.1 Dkt. 27. Mr. Buchanan has not responded. … Graham, 490 U.S. at 396. 1 When the defense of qualified immunity is raised, the Court has discretion to determine if a constitutional violation occurred before addressing whether the law was clearly established

In Re Haraughty

403 B.R. 607 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 1, 2009

Without a statute allowing a creditor to pursue the debtor’s entitlement to such wages, they would be immune from collection.... … From these other examples, the Court concludes that a fund or type of property does not have to be protected in its entirety to qualify as an exemption.

Martin v. Amoco Oil Co.

679 N.E.2d 139 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 3, 1997

to qualify. … To succeed in their challenge, the Intervenors must establish a prima facie case of discrimination. Id. at 834 .

Cain v. State

594 N.E.2d 835 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 2, 1992

To do so, the State first established that the defendant had met several times with the alleged co-conspirator witness. … Thus, the issue of Shepard's ered-ibility was clearly presented to and resolved by the jury. The evidence is insufficient, however, to sustain both counts of robbery upon these facts.

Smith v. Kyler

74 Ind. 575 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 15, 1881

In making a qualified vacation of the first judgment, in granting a new trial of the cause. 8. In overruling the appellants’ motion to set aside a part of the order vacating the first judgment. 9. … and properly shown and established elsewhere, in and by the record.

John F. Harris v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 29, 2016

He also claimed that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate the apartment complex sufficiently to establish that it qualified as a family housing project. … In this review, we accept findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, but we accord no deference to conclusions of law. Id.

Alpha Psi Chapter of Pi Kappa Phi Fraternity, Inc. v. Auditor of Monroe County

849 N.E.2d 1131 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 29, 2006

It is clearly implied . . . and we know it to be true in fact, that in many cases local laws are necessary.” Gentile v. State, 29 Ind. 409, 411-12 (1868) overruled by Heckler v. … Not only does Section 44 exclude all other groups that ordinarily qualify for exemptions, its terms exclude fraternities that are not connected with Indiana University.

ESTATE OF CONNER BY CONNER v. Ambrose

990 F. Supp. 606 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 23, 1997

Furthermore, based on the record, this court is not convinced that defendants are protected by "qualified immunity." The alleged conduct in the present case does not meet the test of "objective, legal reasonableness." … The entity, here the City, is not entitled to the shield of qualified immunity from liability under § 1983. Id., see also, Carey-Jones v. Duffin, No. 82 C 6285, 1985 WL 826 (N.D.Ill. April 16, 1985).

Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. State Ex Rel. McWhir

110 Ind. App. 507 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 4, 1941

On questions of demurrer on appeal, the rule has been well and clearly stated by Judge McMahan in Pittsburgh, etc., R. Co. v. Rushton, supra, as follows ( 90 Ind. … This evidence when considered with all of the other evidence conclusively establishes the fact that the deal of the relatrix was a fully consummated deal on the 26th day of August, 1932.

Hutcherson v. Corbin

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 5, 2023

Moreover, these factual disputes prevent summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. See Smith v. … ” summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is inappropriate).

Haas v. Bush

894 N.E.2d 229 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 29, 2008

In the instant case, the evidence established Elaine was more likely than not to die from her lung cancer even if it had been diagnosed and treated in January 2002. The Estate was clearly unable to establish that Dr. … Haas also raises a constitutional challenge under the Privileges and Immunities Clause, article 1, section 23 of the Indiana Constitution.

James I.M. Lines v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 2017

We reverse only where the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id. … Lines contends that the trial court did not properly establish that Rohlman had the training and experience to be qualified as an expert and to allow her to testify regarding the consistency of the

Rrf v. Llf

935 N.E.2d 243 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 8, 2010

In other words, if both parties qualify for the federal tax credit or certain tax credits, the Court should allocate the expenses equitably so that qualifying parties are not unnecessarily deprived of a deduction. … In other words, if both parties qualify for the federal tax credit or certain tax credits, the Court should allocate the expenses equitably so that qualifying parties are not unnecessarily deprived of a deduction.

Schilling v. Huntington County Community School Corp.

898 N.E.2d 385 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2008

Being a volunteer firefighter clearly qualifies as ‘any other business or occupation.’ Id. … In Landis , the question before this court was whether a second, nonprincipal employment qualified as an “occupation,” as that word was used in Landis’ terms of exclusion.

WARNER v. ANDERSON HOUSING AUTHORITY

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 20, 2024

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue Ms. Davis and Ms. Richardson are entitled to qualified immunity on Mr. … At the motion to dismiss stage, courts "often cannot tell from a complaint whether qualified immunity applies" and thus it is "rarely" the time to decide qualified immunity, which is a fact-driven inquiry. Roldan v.

In Re Bowling

116 B.R. 659 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 7, 1990

Bowling called her indicating a desire to repay the discharged debt in order to re-establish the Debtors’ credit. McLane said that they could do that. Later, when Mrs. … Fidelity would have loaned the new money if the Debtors qualified for the loan even if they did not pay the old loan. People who have discharged loans in bankruptcy are treated no differently than other customers. 4.

Bloomington Country Club, Inc. v. City of Bloomington Water & Wastewater Utilities

827 N.E.2d 1213 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 31, 2005

The IURC cited testimony in Cause No. 42088 as to how "cost of service allocation procedures" had been employed in establishing the irrigation rate. Id. … The privileges and immunities clause prohibits granting to a "citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens." Inp. Congr. art. 1, § 28.