Case law

Thad Dale Stewart, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2016

Appellate Rule 65(D), Mar 10 2016, 8:55 am this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata … Udani was qualified as an expert witness.

Aaron v. City of Tipton

218 Ind. 227 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1941

This is true, because a duty imposed by the legislature upon cities or towns, or a liability against them created by the legislature, may be qualified, limited or removed by that body. … The giving of the notice in our statute is not the establishment of particular conditions. It is merely a preliminary step in the bringing of the action. . . .

Elliott v. State

450 N.E.2d 1058 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 7, 1983

Thus, the information herein charged a lesser included offense as defined in Ind.Code 85-41-1-2 ("established by proof of the same material elements or less than all the material elements required to establish the commission … The independent evidence in this case established that Sheryl died as the result of a bullet wound in the neck.

Adams v. Betz

167 Ind. 161 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 4, 1906

The facts established thereby clearly disclose that appellee is the legal owner of the land in dispute, and is entitled to have his title thereto quieted and set at rest as against the claims made by appellant. … line was so established.

GUTHRIE v. CLINE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 30, 2025

Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) ("Judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from ultimate assessment of damages."). … Guthrie clearly fails to satisfy the third threshold requirement—a likelihood of success on the merits.

St. Mary's Ohio Valley Heart Care, LLC v. Derek F. Smith

112 N.E.3d 1144 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 9, 2018

Yang qualifying his diagnosis, but she testified during her deposition that pathologists often relay diagnoses in terms of “suspicious or suggestive” of cancer. Id. at 198. Regardless of whether Dr. … Yang’s performance.4 Indeed, the designated evidence establishes that Dr. Butler intended to proceed with the lobectomy unless the intraoperative diagnosis was “clearly not cancerous”.

Houston v. State

957 N.E.2d 654 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 18, 2011

An abuse of discretion occurs if the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the trial court. Boggs v. State, 928 N.E.2d 855, 862 (Ind.Ct.App.2010), trans. denied. … After the State established this foundation, the trial court admitted the exhibit.

Schueneman v. Schueneman

591 N.E.2d 603 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 14, 1992

There is no indication that Richard's calculations were intended to arrive at a present value of the plan, and, of course, there was no attempt to *609 qualify Richard as an expert. … Indiana Code 81-l1-11.5-12(d), quoted above, clearly states that child support obligations cease when the child reaches twenty-one. Ross v. Ross (1979), Ind.App., 397 N.E.2d 1066 .

Ault v. Clark

62 Ind. App. 55 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 17, 1916

insufficient to establish one or more facts essential to plaintiff’s cause of action.” … Immunity from collateral attack of an order of a probate court for the sale of a decedent’s real estate, 3 Ann. Cas. 234.

Kho v. Pennington

846 N.E.2d 1036 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 5, 2006

We will reverse such an exercise of discretion only when the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and cireumstances. Id. Dr. … We noted a qualified attorney's legal opinion as to an ultimate fact in issue is admissible unless it addresses matters within the common knowledge and experience of ordinary persons. Id.

Ray

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 14, 2025

acts not shielded by immunity.” … But these allegations do not establish that Malin was really acting as part of the investigative team and not entitled to absolute immunity.

State Ex Rel. O'Donnell v. Flickinger

211 Ind. 361 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1937

O’Donnell seeks to establish his right to the office of trustee as a member of the board of trustees of the department of water works of the city of East Chicago, Indiana. … The inspectors are not city employees or officers and clearly do not come within the provision of Sec. 10 of the Act of 1933.

Dukes v. McKenna

4 Indian Terr. 156 · Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · Sep 25, 1902

Thus early was it evident that the “fee simple” mentioned was a base or qualified fee. … established to admit of dispute that the Indian tribes residing withing the territorial limits of the United States are subject to their authority.”

Tiffany Abbott, Cathie Barnes, and Chandra Gray v. Individual Support Home Health Agency, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 13, 2020

Home Health attempts to analogize the statements made by the Appellants in this case to communications made to law enforcement reporting criminal activity, which are afforded only qualified privilege … The defendants argued that they had a legal obligation to report the injury to the Department of Health and that their statements were immune under the absolute privilege for statements made in quasi-judicial

Clay v. McBride

946 F. Supp. 639 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 7, 1996

established federal law, and such a claim must be dismissed. … The state court’s determination that Clay qualified as an habitual offender based upon the Information filed by the State is a question grounded purely on state law.

Downey v. Indiana Dept Corrections

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 25, 2025

The Warden also maintains that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate a “clearly established” constitutional or statutory right. McAllister v.

Atkinson v. Disher

177 Ind. 665 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 28, 1912

The question was not' presented before the board of commissioners and presented a new issue for the first time in the circuit court, which, under well-established rules of practice, may not be done. Sanasack v. … to change the result if maintained, was to present a question which clearly was not before the board in any form, and was the same in effect as presenting a new issue; but that situation would not ordinarily be available

Pedigo v. Miller

175 Ind. App. 97 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 1977

As a quasi-judicial body, the Industrial Board must be held to have authority to dismiss actions when an employee consistently fails to properly prosecute his claim and consistently fails to comply with established procedures … In fact, the record clearly indicates that the *101 employer failed to comply with an Industrial Board order to schedule the deposition and physical examination on the same day and in the same city.

Suzanne E. Esserman v. Indiana Department of Environmental Management (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 10, 2019

We affirm the agency’s judgment unless it is clearly erroneous. Id. [7] Here, IDEM partially disposed of Esserman’s claims through summary judgment. … Indiana Code section 4-15-2.2-42(f) further provides: An unclassified employee must establish that the [SEAC] has subject matter jurisdiction to hear the employee’s wrongful discharge claim by establishing

Rednour v. Wayne Township

51 F. Supp. 3d 799 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 24, 2014

To establish a prima facie claim under the ADA, a plaintiff must show that: “(1) she is disabled within the meaning of the ADA, (2) she is qualified to perform the essential functions of her job either with or without reasonable … In order to prevail on a “failure to accommodate” ADA claim, a plaintiff must set forth evidence establishing that: “(1) she is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) the employer was aware of her disability; and (