Case law

Greencastle Township v. Black

5 Ind. 557 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1854

The admissions of the township, the party in interest, can not be qualified by the answer of Kercheval, who is only her agent in collecting the taxes. … The words “ uniform and equal rate of assessment and taxation,” and “ all property, both real and personal,” clearly refer to general assessments to be made for the state at large.

Resnover v. State

460 N.E.2d 922 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1984

Appellant specifically argues that the circumstance established by Ind. … The fact that testimony is required by a qualified person to identify those speaking in a recording and to explain the jargon or radio codes used does not make the recording inadmissible per se.

Hawkins v. Marion County Board of Review

182 Ind. App. 205 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 1979

In March, 1977, the Hawkins attempted to file an affidavit of mortgage indebtedness with Forestal, the County Auditor, in order to qualify them for the mortgage tax deduction authorized by Ind. Code 6-1.1-12-1. … The Hawkins contend that, in order to establish whether a conditional vendee is entitled to a mortgage exemption, it is necessary first to determine whether such vendee is one who “owns real property” within the meaning of

Matthew Pavlovich v. State of Indiana

6 N.E.3d 969 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 2014

Taken together, this evidence establishes a reasonable probability that the messages at issue were written by Pavlovich. … Clearly, because there is sufficient evidence to authenticate the messages as having been written by Pavlovich, they qualify as non-hearsay statements by a party-opponent under Indiana Evidence Rule 801(d)(2). 7 The messages

Williamson Co. v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division

145 Ind. App. 266 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 1969

Claimant is entitled to benefits only to the extent he is able to work, available for work, making an independent effort to secure work and is otherwise qualified under the Act.” … In this particular case it is questionable whether such evidence clearly satisfies the test of substantial evidence of probative value, pursuant to the definitions set out above.

POHLE v. ROBERTS, JR.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 13, 2020

R 57(H), and therefore clearly a judicial act for which Chief Justice Rush is entitled to absolute judicial immunity. See Stump v. … Because this case is barred on sovereign immunity and absolute judicial immunity grounds, this dismissal is with prejudice.

O'BANION v. State Ex Rel. Shively

146 Ind. App. 223 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 31, 1969

It is well-established that lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter in such situation is properly presented by demurrer, not by motion to dismiss. Indiana Acts 1881 (Spec. … It is well established that the burden of proving the existence of a non-conforming use is on the party asserting the existence of such non-conforming use.

Howard v. Moore

580 N.E.2d 999 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 1991

Thus, the award of $140.00 monthly was clearly in the nature of support, as Moore was charged with keeping and maintaining the family residence. … The trial court can then make a determination as to the amount of attorney's fees qualifying as nondischargeable debt. In all other things, the trial court is affirmed. BUCHANAN and SHIELDS, JJ., concur. 2 .

Fields v. Candell

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 3, 2020

immunity if a reasonable officer would have believed that the execution of the warrant did not violate any clearly established law. … Caudell would be entitled to qualified immunity. 2In his deposition, Fields indicates that he does not know who damaged his fence, but he assumed that the police did.

City of Fort Wayne v. Cameron

53 Ind. Dec. 92 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 1976

Following the decision in Aaron , which re-established the common law basis of liability and determined the statute to be procedural, the Court in Galbreath v. … The Court reiterated the principle that when one seeks the benefit of a statute, he must bring himself clearly within its terms.

Indiana & Michigan Electric Co. v. City of Anderson

176 Ind. App. 410 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 17, 1978

The “six-mile” authority on which Anderson relies is clearly established by two statutes. IND. … The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens. 4 . Ind.

Higert v. City of Greencastle

43 Ind. 574 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1873

*583 >We think not, clearly. This was a judicial act, for the nonperformance of which she can not be held liable. … It is very clearly established by the above authority that the appellee is liable for damages occasioned by the wrongful acts of John F.

Peterson v. State

674 N.E.2d 528 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1996

The Riverside Court declared that, as a general matter, a jurisdiction which provides judicial determination of probable cause within forty-eight hours of arrest will be immune from systemic challenges unless the arrested … However, we will not employ a standard that requires the facts in the record to so clearly point to the imposition of the death penalty that the jury’s recommendation is unreasonable.

Foust v. William E. English Foundation

118 Ind. App. 484 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1948

English, including the establishment of a William E. … The provision of the will creating the trust clearly indicates testator desired this home to be built on other property if it was not feasible to build it on the property in question.

Lake States Insurance Co. v. Tech Tools, Inc.

743 N.E.2d 314 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 26, 2001

alighting from" or "getting out of" an automobile: We believe the proper determination of whether an individual is "alighting from" or "getting out of" an automobile requires the examination of several factors which may establish … Therefore, because Miller never intended to reach a zone of safety, he had clearly embarked upon a course of conduct distinct from acts reasonably necessary to make an exit from the car. Id.

Southern Illinois Grain Inspection Service, Inc. v. United States

881 F. Supp. 1229 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 17, 1995

UNITED STATES GRAIN STANDARDS ACT The Federal Grain Inspection Service was established by the United States Grain Standards Act in 1976. 7 U.S.C. §§ 71 et seq. … is better qualified.”

Whitaker v. State

778 N.E.2d 423 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 2002

Now, to be convicted of involuntary manslaughter the offense committed must be battery, or one that inherently poses a risk of serious bodily injury and is a Class C or D felony or Class A misdemeanor. 5 Clearly, since at … infractions standing alone amount to "reckless driving” as defined by Indiana Code Section 9-21-8-52(a), although driving "at such an unreasonably high rate of speed” as to endanger the safety or property of others may qualify

D.M. v. State

949 N.E.2d 327 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 22, 2011

But the form could more clearly indicate the parent’s role. … For purposes of this opinion, we use the shorthand "parent” as inclusive of all the qualifying adults identified in Indiana Code section 31-32-5-1(2). .

Kenworth of Indianapolis, Inc. v. Seventy-Seven Limited, Convey All, LLC, Keller Trucking, Inc., K&K Aggregate, Inc., Huber Transport, LLC, Triple H Trucking, LLC, and Custom Hauling, Inc.

112 N.E.3d 1106 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2018

[12] The overarching question in this appeal is whether the Defendants have established as a matter of law that the Plaintiffs’ complaint was untimely filed. … Vol. 2 at 6, which suggests that extended factual development may be required to establish the accrual date for each Plaintiff.

Gillian v. State

207 Ind. 661 · Indiana Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1935

were not for the provision that the prosecuting attorney is required to approve the affidavit and endorse thereon “approved by me,” we do not think it could be seriously contended that the prosecuting attorney would not be qualified … It is clearly seen that the instruction went far beyond the provision of the statute as above set out.