Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersIN

9,074 results

2.72s

  • Fulton County Commissioners v. Miller

    788 N.E.2d 1284 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 30, 2003

    Reversal of the trial court's ruling is warranted only when the court has abused its discretion, and its action is clearly erroneous and against the facts and cireumstances before it. Id. … Thus, the County is correct that the Manual does not establish the standard of care in this case.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Elkins

    District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 30, 2026

    Based on this information, Elkins financially qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis. … Should Elkins file an amended complaint in this matter, the complaint must clearly explain the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, as well as the timeframe, facts, and legal basis for his claims; that is the who, what,

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Healy v. National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners, Inc.

    870 F. Supp. 2d 607 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 3, 2012

    Baten clearly establish this discrepancy with respect to Matthew. … Baten’s testimony establishes that Matthew may have a relative personal weakness when it comes to these areas, which weakness results from his reading disability, but her testimony clearly establishes that he is not substantially

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Berman v. Cannon

    878 N.E.2d 836 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 26, 2007

    Berman’s absence from the trial does not qualify under any of the three exceptions in Rule 606(b). Consequently, the juror’s statement is not evidence that we may consider. See, e.g., Evans v. … “We cannot invade the province of the jury to decide the facts and cannot reverse unless the verdict is clearly erroneous.” Id.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Indiana State Board of Health Facility Administrators v. Werner

    841 N.E.2d 1196 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 2006

    The State failed to prove that Respondent undertook professional activities she was not qualified to undertake. See IC 25-1-9-4(4)(A)(1). 4. … Here, because a variety of sanctions are available, the record does not clearly require the imposition of a specific sanction against Werner. See Lamb, 256 Ind. at 70 , 267 N.E.2d at 165 .

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: N.Q., Je.Q., Ja.Q., L.Q., Minor Children, T.Q., Mother, and A.Q., Father v. Indiana Department of Child Services

    Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 8, 2013

    [Parents] have failed to qualify for social security on several attempts, but they are hopeful with their new social security attorney. Id. at 74. … The Court in Matter of Robinson noted in that: It was clearly established at that hearing that the children were wards of the Welfare Department in foster home care, that they were to remain so, and

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • NOBLE CTY. COUNCIL ETC. v. State Ex Rel. Fifer

    234 Ind. 172 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1955

    Within and dependent upon this structure of constitutional government, our people are blessed by a galaxy of rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed to us by constitutional declaration. … Therefore, appellee was clearly entitled to an order mandating an appropriation for his salary for the year 1952.

    Cited 56 timesPublished
  • Wathen v. Allison Engine Co. Div. of Rolls Royce Aerospace Group

    102 F. Supp. 2d 1015 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 18, 2000

    Wathen establish the existence of material fact issues necessitating a trial. … However, Wathen clearly admitted to this proposition in her deposition. Q: "Now, you say ‘if you would have got the promotion in 1995.'

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Bolton v. State

    223 Ind. 308 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 2, 1945

    He is, therefore, best qualified to determine what credence or consideration should be given to the retraction, and his opinion is accordingly entitled to great weight. … It is too firmly established to_ require the citation of any authorities that the trial court is vested with a wide discretion in passing upon motions for a new trial and that only when it is clearly made to appear that the

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Stinnett v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance

    58 F. Supp. 2d 1000 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 18, 1999

    Excusing compliance with policy provisions that require physician treatment during a claimed disability period is justified only when the existence of the disability is clearly established and there is a rational basis for … Stinnett suffered a qualifying disability under the terms of those policies during the time period in question.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • State ex rel. Schrenker v. Superior Court

    242 Ind. 171 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1961

    That two (2) qualified physicians should be appointed to make an examination of this person alleged to be mentally ill and dangerous to the community. … It clearly appears from the record here that no finding was made by respondent, Superior Court of Madison County, that Phyllis Schrenker was an incompetent prior to the appointment of the temporary guardian.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Warrick v. Pierce

    554 F. Supp. 895 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 5, 1983

    Warrick was rated “Qualified” (R. 521), while Russell was rated “Best Qualified” and selected (R. 519). 58. … To accomplish this, the defendant must clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, the reasons for the plaintiff’s rejections. Id.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • McCarty v. Purdue University The Trustees of

    District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 1, 2021

    Because she has failed to establish that any exception to Purdue’s sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment applies, Ms. McCarty’s FLSA claim against Purdue must fail. … Under the FLSA, an individual qualifies as an “employer” if she “had supervisory authority over the complaining employee and was responsible in whole or part for the alleged violation.” Riordan v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Tazian v. Cline

    673 N.E.2d 485 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 1996

    The law established in precedent is that, "[t]he primary rule in interpreting a deed is that it is to be taken as a whole, with the grantor's intention controlling. … Legler, 245 Ind. 655 , 199 N.E.2d 346 (1964). [4] Because we find the language of the deed to clearly convey a fee simple estate, we decline to consider the public policy issues raised by the Tazians.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor v. Duke Energy Indiana, LLC

    Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 19, 2024

    accountable branches of government or a judicial branch largely immune from answering to the public? … After all, it’s “frequently in the consideration of mixed questions that the scope of statutory terms is established and their meaning defined.” Loper Bright, 144 S.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Allen v. Proksch

    832 N.E.2d 1080 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 17, 2005

    Since that time, Father has tried to establish a relationship with [C.A.] but [C.A.] has resisted. 6. … Casserly to be well qualified and his testimony very helpful. 64. Dr.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Colter v. Frese

    45 Ind. 96 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1873

    "The 648th section is somewhat obscurely worded, but-it does not, as we think, extend the remedy given by the preceding section, but rather limits or qualifies it. … When the legislative will has been clearly and constitutionally expressed, the courts have no alternative' but to follow it.

    Cited 47 timesPublished
  • State Ex Rel. Pollard v. Criminal Ct. of Marion Cty.

    263 Ind. 236 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1975

    The first criminal grand jury was established by the crown in 1164, to provide the centralized government with the benefit of local knowledge in the apprehension of criminals. … Unless the court finds that the issuance of the order would be clearly contrary to public interest, the witness shall comply with the order of the court.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Davis v. State

    835 N.E.2d 1102 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2005

    When a defendant alleges that the trial court failed to identify or find a mitigating circumstance, the defendant must establish that the mitigating evidence is both significant and clearly supported by the record. … While Davis presents these factors as mitigators, he has not established their significance.

    Cited 104 timesPublished
  • St. Mary's Medical Center, of Evansville, Inc. v. Warrick County Ex Rel. Board of Commissioners

    671 N.E.2d 929 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 28, 1996

    DISCUSSION AND DECISION Indiana Code § 86-22-24 provides that the county executive "shall establish and maintain ... a county jail...." … Indiana Code § 12-16-3-1 delineates the medical criteria an individual must satisfy to qualify for HCI benefits.

    Cited 3 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.