Case law

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

848 N.E.2d 668 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 6, 2006

Drafting and preparing testamentary and trust documents is clearly the practice of law. … Conclusion, Injunction, and Costs The evidence establishes that Northouse and Ramer have engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.

State v. Monfort

723 N.E.2d 407 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 26, 2000

perceiving the obstacles to the success of an iniquitous intention are to be expected from the scruples of the courts, are in a manner compelled by the very motives of the injustice they mediate, to qualify … As already explained, superior courts, as courts of general jurisdiction, enjoy the same immunity as circuit courts from interference that violates the separation of powers.

I-465, LLC v. Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II of Marion County, Indiana, Jeffrey R. Baumgarth and The Myers Y. Cooper Company

36 N.E.3d 1094 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 18, 2015

relief was prejudiced by a BZA decision that is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … to justify a variance, and its decision was supported by adequate findings, which in turn were supported by the evidence, and therefore not clearly erroneous.

Chrysler Group, LLC v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development

960 N.E.2d 118 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 19, 2012

The “key points of the Trelleborg analysis” that Chrysler would have us apply to Section 22-4-14-1(c) are that “the employer clearly must have first made and announced a decision to lay off certain employees or to close a … An employee who qualified for the optional lay-off requested it and, after her employer granted the request, applied for unemployment benefits. Id. at 486.

Mennonite Board of Missions, Inc. v. Adams

427 N.E.2d 686 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 1981

The challenging party has the burden to present a strong and clear case establishing the unconstitutionality of the statutes. … Upon enactment, the MLA granted mineral interest owners a two year period of grace to effect a qualifying “use” to preserve the interest.

Prewitt v. State

761 N.E.2d 862 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 14, 2002

In order to qualify as fundamental error, an error must be so prejudicial to the rights of the defendant as to make a fair trial impossible. … State, 517 N.E.2d 54, 62 (Ind.1987) ("[Wle have clearly held that our attempt statute can have application only to specific intent crimes....").

MCGOFFNEY v. SWEENEY

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 27, 2025

McGoffney must "clearly establish" that "there is newly discovered evidence or that there has been a manifest error of law or fact." Harrington v. … She raises a variety of arguments, see dkt. 14 at 6–18, but none of them explain why Judge Sweeney would not be entitled to immunity for his decisions in Ms. McGoffney's civil rights action.

Stockwell v. Whitehead

47 Ind. App. 423 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 7, 1911

The complaint specifically avers, not as a recital, but as an allegation of substantive fact, “that the above-mentioned subscribers, including defendant, appointed Louis Weinsheimer, at that time the duly qualified and acting … Clearly the contract with appellee, marked exhibit B, is in ac *429 cordanee Avith the agreement marked exhibit A, for the latter agreement certainly authorizes the money subscribed to be used for the purchase of broken rock

P.G. v. M.G. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2020

An abuse of discretion occurs if the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it. Id. … whether or not for profit; (C) making the record was a regular practice of that activity; (D) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified

Johns v. State

159 Ind. 413 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 18, 1902

In a later case the same court said: “A rule of criminal plead *416 ing, which at one time obtained in some of the circuits, and perhaps received a qualified sanction from this court in United Stales v. … Darlington, 153 Ind. 1 , 2: “It is generally true, as a rule of criminal pleading, that, where the principal act or acts constituting the offense are clearly defined by the statute, it is sufficient to charge the offense

Hall v. Fivecoat

110 Ind. App. 704 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 21, 1942

Hall died intestate and unmarried, in and a resident of Bartholomew County, Indiana, leaving administratable assets in said county; that Irwin-Union Trust Co. is the duly appointed, qualified and acting administrator of this … When therefore the word ‘child,’ or ‘children,’ or ‘brother,’ or ‘sister,’ is used in the statute of descent, it must be held to mean legitimate child, children, brother or sister, unless the language of the statute clearly

Daniels v. Hutson

489 N.E.2d 107 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 19, 1986

(emphasis supplied) While this language clearly authorizes the State Board to order a county welfare director's removal, the statute does not indicate that such authority is exclusively vested with the State Board. … Inclusion on an eligibility list presumes that an individual has been found qualified by an entrance test. IC 4-15-2-3(J).

Schaill Ex Rel. Kross v. Tippecanoe County School Corp.

679 F. Supp. 833 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 1, 1988

Bracy recommended establishment of pre- and post-measures of performance, and cross-checks with the performance of others. … In T.L.O., the Supreme Court clearly laid to rest the doctrine of in loco parentis as a theory of the school’s immunity from suit.

Ellis

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 18, 2025

Murray (first name unknown), but does not clearly explain how, if at all, she was involved in these events. His allegations about “defendants” WL 25359, at *3 (S.D. Ill. … Ellis mentions the words “policy” and “practice” several times in his complaint but does not clearly allege what the policy or practice was that caused him injury.

Jerald Clark, III v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 1, 2016

FILED this Memorandum Decision shall not be Sep 01 2016, 5:57 am regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK court except for the purpose of establishing … However, a court abuses its discretion if it does not consider significant mitigators advanced by the defendant and clearly supported by the record. Anglemyer, 868 N.E.2d at 490.

Ambers v. Tippecanoe County

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 13, 2024

As the Indiana Court of Appeals has put it, “the Tort Claims Act contains an unequivocal affirmative statement that clearly evinces the legislature’s intention not to subject the State or local government to suit by persons … It is well established that ITCA immunity does not apply to claims of assault, battery, and excessive force. Wilson v. Isaacs, 929 N.E.2d 200, 204 (Ind. 2010). In Kemezy v.

Bowman v. Internationa Business Machines Corp.

853 F. Supp. 2d 766 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 21, 2012

After the termination, the FSSA established direct contracts with many of the former sub-contractors, which continued carrying out their previously delegated functions. (Id. ¶ 17). … Also, before terminating benefits Defendants had a duty to assess whether a recipient who no longer qualified under one Medicaid category might qualify under another category. (Id. ¶ 26).

In Re Snider Farms, Inc.

125 B.R. 993 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 8, 1991

Thus, good faith alone does not immunize a party from a civil contempt sanction for noncompliance with a Court order. McLean v. Central State, etc., 762 F.2d 1204 , 1210 (4th Cir.1985). … This the Trustee has clearly shown, and the Court finds the Respondent in civil contempt of this Court for knowingly violating the orders of this court.

Beer Distributor of Indiana, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Indiana Alcoholic Beverage Commission

431 N.E.2d 836 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 22, 1982

I.C. 7.1-3-2-4 provides: A brewer or other person located outside this state who is desirous of selling beer to an Indiana permittee for importation into, and resale in Indiana, in order to qualify under this title, shall … This section clearly establishes a residency requirement for partnerships and corporations.

Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America, Inc. v. United States Atomic Energy Commission

380 F. Supp. 630 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 13, 1974

All members are scientists or engineers who are eminently qualified in various fields needed to conduct a nuclear safety review. … In the Federal Establishment, as in General Motors or any other hierarchical giant, there are enough incentives as it is for playing it safe and listing with the wind; Congress clearly did not propose to add to them the threat