Case law

State Ex Rel. Indiana State Bar Ass'n v. Diaz

838 N.E.2d 433 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 6, 2005

Adequate communication must be established, especially if the client does not speak English. … established that Diaz has engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.

Gambill v. State

479 N.E.2d 523 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1985

Dogracias was eminently qualified by training and experience in the field *528 of pathology. … Appellant objected at trial and now to the admission of this testimony based upon a failure to establish a proper chain of custody.

Hodges v. Swafford

863 N.E.2d 881 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 3, 2007

The evidence clearly shows that Seit-zinger was an active participant in the transactions between the Hodgeses and Swafford. … Clearly, there was a very costly finance charge connected with the Hodgeses’ extension of credit, but was it “payable” at or before closing?

Van Vactor Farms, Inc. v. Marshall County Plan Commission

793 N.E.2d 1136 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 20, 2003

We will only reverse the Commission's decision if the evidence, viewed as a whole, demonstrates that the Commission's conclusions are clearly erroneous. Id. … The ordinance must contain specific standards by which the plan commission can determine whether the plat qualifies for approval. IND.CODE § 36-7-4-702(b).

Sturrup v. Mahan

290 N.E.2d 64 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 1972

He established a new residence with a legally appointed guardian. … Rights, privileges and immunities not derived from the federal Constitution or secured thereby are left exclusively to the protection *71 of the states.'

In Re Guardianship of Cmw

755 N.E.2d 644 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 14, 2001

In November 2000, Mother and C.M.W. moved to Arkansas and established residence with Mother's boyfriend and two roommates. … Thus, neither Arkansas nor Indiana qualifies as C.M.W.'s home state.

DePauw Plate Glass Co. v. City of Alexandria

152 Ind. 443 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1899

It may not thus find immunity from taxation. It will be held to one jurisdiction or the other. … There is nothing in the case to show that the township ever attempted to exercise authority over appellant’s property, nor to show that appellant ever acknowledged any such authority, while the facts clearly show an exercise

Gross Income Tax Division v. Warner Bros. Pictures Distributing Corp.

233 Ind. 345 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1954

Ct. 793 , 77 L. ed. 1503), are clearly distinguishable from the case at bar and lend no support to appellant’s position. … It does not follow that because a transaction is one in interstate commerce, and thereby comes within the terms of the Anti-trust Act, that it is, therefore, immune from state taxation. *352 The tax involved in the Henneford

Bei Bei Shuai v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 2012

A decision is an abuse of discretion when it ―is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances.‖ Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184, 188 (Ind. 2007). … I conclude that by charging Shuai with the intentional killing of a viable fetus, the State failed to establish the essential element of that crime, i.e., that A.S. was a viable fetus.

Randall L. Grigsby v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 7, 2016

To qualify as fundamental error, “an error must be so prejudicial to the rights of the defendant as to make a fair trial impossible.” Willey v. … Having waived in his brief the question of the inadmissibility of the evidence at issue, Grigsby cannot establish error—to say nothing of his ability to meet the extremely high threshold required to establish

Ronald Gaines v. State of Indiana

999 N.E.2d 999 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 20, 2013

Moreover, the exhibit clearly demonstrates that a protective order was issued to S.G. to prevent Gaines from contacting her and clearly ordered Gaines to stay away from S.G.’s residence. … and not for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at trial—they are not testimonial.”

FLYNN v. CONSOLIDATED CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS AND MARION COUNTY

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 27, 2023

"[Q]ualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct 'does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.'" … To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff "must show both (1) that the facts make out a constitutional violation, and (2) that the constitutional right was 'clearly established' at the time of the official's alleged

DeLon v. Eli Lilly & Co.

990 F. Supp. 2d 865 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 31, 2013

This lack of response is telling, as Lilly’s position is clearly correct. In Indiana, charges of discrimination “must be filed within 300 days of the occurrence of the act that is the basis of the complaint.” Doe v. … But the Seventh Circuit has also stated, rather categorically, that the “[i]nability to work for a multi-month period” precludes a person from establishing that they are a qualified individual under the ADA. Byrne v.

Lee Alan Bryant Health Care Facilities, Inc. v. Hamilton

788 N.E.2d 495 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 16, 2003

. _ Bryant Health Care is a qualified provider of residential care to RCAP recipients. … Thus, contrary to Plaintiffs' assertion, these statutes do not obligate DDARS to pay for residential care for all qualified individuals.

Damonta Lamont Jarrett v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2020

These statutes do not clearly permit multiple punishments, either expressly or by unmistakable implication. … Here, there is no dispute that Jarrett’s attempted robbery conviction qualifies.

Huie v. Private Truck Council of America, Inc.

466 N.E.2d 435 · Indiana Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1984

It is well established that a state may not, by its tax scheme, discriminate against interstate commerce and in favor of intrastate commerce. Alaska v. … The statute clearly exempts motor carrier companies operating solely in intrastate commerce.

Sullivan v. Day

661 N.E.2d 848 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 20, 1996

could qualify for medical services. … which would have caused him to no longer qualify under the medical definition.

Levine v. United States

25 F. Supp. 2d 900 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 18, 1998

At best, Levine has an issue for appeal; he has not established bias or prejudice. … At best, Levine has an issue for appeal; he has not established bias or prejudice.

COX v. RANDY WEITZEL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 25, 2021

"The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials 'from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … "[A] negative answer to either one is enough to establish the defense of qualified immunity." Hanes v. Zurick, 578 F.3d 491, 493 (7th Cir. 2009).

In the Matter of: L.S., C.S., & W.S., (Minor Children) and J.S. (Father) v. The Ind. Dept. of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 2016

Supreme Court Court of Appeals as precedent or cited before any court except and Tax Court for the purpose of establishing … L.S. did not qualify for the program and neither parent sought any further treatment or therapy.