Case law

Kimbrew v. Evansville Police Department

867 F. Supp. 818 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 1994

The potential for liability of Officer John Evans accordingly brings to issue the availability of qualified immunity. In Harlow v. … This places on a civil rights- plaintiff the heavy burden of “establishing the existence of a clearly established constitutional right [violated].” 17 F.3d at 951 .

State ex rel. Indiana State Bar Ass'n v. Moritz

244 Ind. 156 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1963

The relator is not immune from these well established rules of practice. … The designation may further indicate the nature and character of the office, but it clearly was not meant to nor does it define the qualifications of that office.

J.H. v. School Town of Munster

160 F. Supp. 3d 1079 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 3, 2016

In evaluating whether the officials could be protected by qualified immunity, the court focused on two primary questions: (1) whether the law clearly established that the Equal Protection Clause required school officials … A failure to comply with that law negates qualified immunity.

David Pflugh v. Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission sitting as the Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission and as the Board of Zoning Appeals Division of Marion County, Indiana

108 N.E.3d 904 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 2018

[13] The trial court found that Pflugh failed to establish that he was particularly harmed, and it is well-settled that we will not set aside a trial court’s findings unless they are clearly erroneous … Pflugh does not claim, much less establish, that the trial court’s findings are clearly erroneous.

Blair v. City of Evansville, Ind.

361 F. Supp. 2d 846 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 17, 2005

under Indiana law, the individual Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. … The defense of qualified immunity protects an individual defendant from liability under § 1983 unless his conduct violated clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable government official in his position

BUNNELL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 14, 2026

Qualified immunity standard "Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from suit under § 1983 unless their conduct violates clearly established law." Zorn v. … Graham do not by themselves create clearly established law outside an ‘obvious case.'"). Instead, to overcome qualified immunity, Plaintiffs must point to analogous precedent clearly establishing the violation.

Van De Leuv v. Methodist Hospital of Indiana, Inc.

642 N.E.2d 531 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 1994

The plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating that qualified privilege has been abused. Id. … Alternatively, Methodist and EMGI argue that they are immune from van de Leuy's defamation claim pursuant to Indiana Code 34-4-12.6-3(b) (the "Peer Review Act").

King Ex Rel. King v. Northeast Security, Inc.

790 N.E.2d 474 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 27, 2003

“The party seeking immunity bears the burden of establishing its conduct comes within the Act.” Mullin, 639 N.E.2d at 281. 1. … App. 1981) (“Insomuch as this action was undertaken by the Department pursuant to a duty entrusted to it by statute, it qualifies for immunity under [subsections (5), (6), or (7)].”).

Witte v. Mundy Ex Rel. Mundy

820 N.E.2d 128 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 6, 2005

This reasoning applies to parent-child immunity just as it does to workers’ compensation. … The defendants do not claim that Officer McCarty qualified as an expert.

GREENLEE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 31, 2026

Qualified Immunity Standard "[Q]ualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct 'does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Greenlee has not shown that he was deprived of due process under clearly established law, as required to overcome qualified immunity.

Idris v. Marion County Assessor

12 N.E.3d 331 · Indiana Tax Court · Jun 4, 2014

The Court will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board if it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Finally, the Marion County Tax Reports and real estate listings upon which Kamenova relied not only overtly qualified their own accuracy but also indicated that only one of the three units was larger than Kamenova’s property

Arnold v. State

460 N.E.2d 494 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 2, 1984

It has been clearly established in Indiana that a police officer may arrest an individual without a warrant when the officer has reasonable and probable cause to believe that the person has committed a felony. … Rather, the evidence clearly established that defendant and his accomplice entered Murray's apartment by force, bound and gagged the occupants and demanded and obtained money and jewelry.

Walker v. State

267 Ind. 649 · Indiana Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1978

In a post-conviction proceeding, the petitioner has the burden of establishing his grounds for relief by a preponderance of the evidence. Lockhart v. State, (1971) 257 Ind. 349 , 274 N.E.2d 523 . … When the prosecuting attorney discovered these promises he corrected the situation by clearly telling the witness that no immunity was being offered her. This was five months prior to her testimony.

DeHarder Investment Corp. v. Indiana Housing Finance Authority

909 F. Supp. 606 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 8, 1995

At its simplest, however, the amendment immunizes a state from suit in federal court unless one of two well-established exceptions exists. 2 Significantly, for *611 purposes of this analysis, state agencies are entitled to … To have a constitutionally protected property interest, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it.

Rhiver v. Rietman

148 Ind. App. 266 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 1970

Immunity is a central consideration to this noble goal. … We think the examining physician’s privilege from civil liability may be qualified where malpractice is demonstrated.

Indiana Alcoholic Beverage Commission v. Osco Drug, Inc.

431 N.E.2d 823 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 18, 1982

If these permittees do not meet this requirement, they do not qualify to hold their new permit. … This raises a presumption that the legislature intended to change the law unless it clearly appears that the amendment was made only to express the original intention of the legislature more clearly. Daubenspeck v.

Meyer Waste System, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

741 N.E.2d 1 · Indiana Tax Court · Dec 7, 2000

Therefore, this Court holds that based upon established precedent, Meyer Waste owns the garbage that it hauls. B. … The facts clearly state that the stone was sold at Calcar’s Plant, not at the purchasers chosen delivery location.

Hamilton County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals v. Oaken Bucket Partners, LLC

938 N.E.2d 654 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 15, 2010

Standard of Review The Indiana Tax Court was established to develop and apply specialized expertise in the prompt, fair, and uniform resolution of state tax cases. Miller Brewing Co. v. Ind. … Rather, the statute allows a charitable purposes exemption to any entity which otherwise qualifies. Id.

Buffalo v. Buffalo

441 N.E.2d 711 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 1982

Instead, a new family unit had been established which consisted of plaintiff and her mother. … Clearly, mother can bring suit against father for the recovery of medical expenses and loss of her child’s services.

Buxton v. Lovell

559 F. Supp. 979 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 1, 1983

Minimum standards to qualify for a degree or title, as determined by recognized and qualified institutions or regulating boards, may be sufficient. … Assuming the Board had clearly regulated the area in issue, Mr. Buxton did not establish his claim for denial of equal protection benefits since no arbitrary or irrational classifications were sufficiently presented.