Case law

Citizens Energy Coalition of Indiana, Inc. v. Sendak

459 F. Supp. 248 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 16, 1978

The Attorney General, acting in his quasi-judicial capacity, is immune from liability for monetary damages. However, this immunity does not extend to injunctive relief. Drollinger v. … The counselor shall be a practicing attorney, and qualified by knowledge and experience to practice in public utility proceedings.

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.

BKC v. State

781 N.E.2d 1157 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 2003

Specifically, B.K.C. argues that his determinate wardship was erroneous because "a prerequisite to determining if a juvenile offender qualifies for a [determinate] sentence is a determination by the judge under Indiana Code … The qualifying offenses include ten with sexual elements (i.e., Ind.Code §§ 5-2-12-4(a)(1) (10)) and two, kidnapping and criminal confinement, where the victim is less than eighteen years of age (i.e., Ind.Code §§ 5-2-12-

United Beverage Co. of South Bend, Inc. v. Indiana Alcoholic Beverage Commission

566 F. Supp. 650 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 21, 1983

In 1939 the state legislature discarded the existing quota system, along with geographic territories, and removed the Commission’s discretion to deny a license to a qualified applicant. (1939 Ind.Acts, Ch. 29, Sec. 2, p. … Clearly, if this section protects a wholesaler’s managerial decision regarding internal controls, it also protects the wholesaler’s business judgment as to who his customers will be.

In the Matter of the Guardianship of M.B., Mariea L. Best v. Russell C. Best (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 16, 2015

[5] While the appeal in Best II was pending, Russell filed a petition to establish guardianship over M.B.’s person in Boone Superior Court. … attend the guardianship hearing and that she could testify if called as a witness. 3 The trial court’s dismissal of Mariea’s petition for replacement was “without prejudice if [Russell] (a) is found not qualified

Adkins v. Vigilant Insurance Co.

927 N.E.2d 385 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 17, 2010

Interpretation of Insurance Policies It is well-established that the interpretation of an insurance policy is primarily a question of law for the court. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Michigan Mut. Ins. … Specifically, Adkins argues that Vigilant's use of the disjunctive in the passage above allows Neese's automobile insurance policy to qualify as underlying insurance.

State Ex Rel. Coffin v. Superior Court

196 Ind. 614 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 27, 1925

Civil rights are those which have no relation to the establishment, support, or management of the government. … The facts of that case are clearly distinguishable from those of the case at bar in many respects, but more especially with relation to the facts relied on as creating a special emergency that called for extraordinary relief

Dws v. Lds

654 N.E.2d 1170 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 28, 1995

conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony or affidavit of the custodian or other qualified … To the extent that parts of the reports establish that an incident was reported by L.D.S. and her therapist, and contain the preparers' direct observations of B.M.S, those parts are admissible.

Collins v. State

966 N.E.2d 96 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 19, 2012

establish the lesser included offense, then the lesser included offense is inherently included in the crime charged. … An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court or it misinterprets the law. Id.

Rogers v. Rogers

437 N.E.2d 92 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1982

Robert Lee Rogers clearly accepted. See Moore v. Bowyer (1979) 388 N.E.2d 611 .” … The Commission further commented under Ind.Code 32-4-1.5 that the joint bank account does not qualify as a common law gift because the donor does not surrender dominion.

T.J. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2015

The juvenile court overruled T.J.’s objection and admitted the autopsy report; however, the juvenile court qualified its ruling by stating that Dr. … “Because the trial court is best able to weigh the evidence and assess witness credibility, we review its rulings on admissibility for abuse of discretion and only reverse if a ruling is clearly against the

Carpenter v. Goodall

144 Ind. App. 134 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 1969

To the contrary, the record clearly indicates that the court sought the information relative to race solely for the purpose of completing vital statistics information. … to submit to one or riipre grouping' tests . byá duly. qualified' .physician,’ to. determine , whether or not the defendant can be excluded as being the father'of the child, and the results, of: such tests may be received

Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Montgomery

152 Ind. 1 · Indiana Supreme Court · Feb 19, 1898

place and performing the duty of the corporation in that behalf, while the writer hereof is of the opinion that the whole of the fourth subdivision must stand together, and that the words quoted from the concluding clause qualify … It is next contended that the act violates section 23 of article 1 of the Constitution, providing that “the General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privileges or immunities which upon the same

Sexton v. State

262 Ind. 554 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1974

The admission of improper evidence which tends only to disclose a fact which is clearly proved by other legitimate and uncontroverted evidence is harmless error. Crim, a/k/a Miller v. … Over the defendant’s objection that the witness was not qualified “* * * to interpret terms in the legal sense * * a State’s witness was permitted to answer the question “* * * Is a neurosis a legal disease?”

Henry B. Gilpin Co. v. Moxley

434 N.E.2d 914 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 5, 1982

The assertion in an affidavit of conclusions of law or opinions by one not qualified to testify to such will not suffice. E.g., Podgorny v. … As a layman, Moxley might qualify as an expert regarding reasonable attorneys’ fees for the collection of promissory notes, see State v.

Washington v. State

390 N.E.2d 983 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 14, 1979

We have held that where oral remarks made by the court during voir dire are clearly qualified as not being instrucsion from his mental disorders is sufficient to subsequently given, there is no abuse of discretion in giving … Since the admissibility of lay witness opinion testimony on ultimate fact issues is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court and the police officer’s experience was clearly established, there was no error in

Anderson v. State

961 N.E.2d 19 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 31, 2012

Indeed, the Court explained: As established in Miranda v. … The record clearly establishes that Smith relied upon two court orders when advising Anderson that he was required to submit a DNA sample.

Shellie S. Gryniewicz f/k/a Shellie S. Shih v. Daniel Shih (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 27, 2015

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as May 27 2015, 9:05 am precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense … We take the gist of this comment to be that not all visits in which a child stays overnight may qualify for the parenting time credit.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of D.H., Jr. and Ar.L. (Minor Children) An.L. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 2019

He further told FCM Middleton that, had Ar.L “received her two month immunization shots,” those shots “could’ve possibly prevented” the meningitis. Ex. Vol. II at 46. … Clearly, there [is] some mental illness that is not being addressed with each parent.

Matter of Antcliff

629 N.E.2d 848 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1994

The court approved the petition, and Respondent qualified as executor. … Respondent’s guardianship report was never approved by the court. *851 The above facts clearly and convincingly establish that Respondent failed to provide competent representation, in contravention of Ind.Professional Conduct