Case law

VFW Post 2953 v. City of Evansville and Evansville Common Council

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 15, 2013

and Immunities Clause, which provides: 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 … Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause imposes two requirements[.]”

Fuehrer v. Storm

769 N.E.2d 622 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 2002

A judgment on the pleadings is proper only when there are no genuine issues of material fact and when the facts shown by the pleadings clearly establish that the non-moving party cannot in any way succeed under the facts … Landowners assert that the Storms do not qualify for remonstrance under this section.

Palmer v. State

173 Ind. App. 208 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 31, 1977

The burden is upon the moving party to establish that no material facts are in genuine issue. Tapp v. Haskins (1974), 160 Ind. … The established rule in this State is that: “Statutes are to be construed as having a prospective operation unless the language clearly indicates that they were intended to be retrospective. (Citations omitted.).

Property Owners, Inc. v. City of Anderson

231 Ind. 78 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jul 23, 1952

E. 623 . 2 Findings of fact thirteen through thirty-five, inclusive, indicate clearly that this is not such new construction as requires the vote of the people, and the City of Anderson was not now entering upon the policy … The reasoning of these cases is in substance that the purpose is the single one of establishing municipal ownership of a public utility, and that the method of acquirement, whether by purchase or construction, relates only

SHELBY NAT'L. BK., ADM. v. Miller

147 Ind. App. 203 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 1970

App. at page 552, this court stated: “The questions asked clearly invaded the province of the court and jury. … Nor did the prior evidence establish such physical facts.

Eldon E. Harmon v. State of Indiana

971 N.E.2d 674 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2012

established. … The evidence presented at trial was clearly sufficient to support a Class B felony conviction, and Harmon concedes as much on appeal.

Peare v. McFarland

577 F. Supp. 791 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 6, 1984

The plain meaning of § (A)(i) conclusively establishes Congress’ intent. … Congress clearly intended an offset for most Social Security pension payments and the Secretary’s interpretation to that effect (and Indiana’s conforming interpretation of § (A)(i)) is therefore valid and correct.

Die & Mold, Inc. v. Western

448 N.E.2d 44 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 1983

It is well established in other jurisdictions, however, that a vacation with pay is, in effect, additional wages. In re Wil-Low Cafeterias, Inc. v. Siegel, (2nd Cir.1940) 111 F.2d 429 ; Monroe v. … The court stated: "In the case at bar, all employees who had been in the service of the appellee for not less than one year prior to June 1, 1951, qualified for vacation pay.

Dunmoyer v. Wells County, Indiana Area Plan Commission

32 N.E.3d 785 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 12, 2015

Section 1602 entitles a petitioner to judicial review upon a showing that the petitioner qualifies under: (1) Section 1603 concerning standing; (2) Section 1604 concerning exhaustion of administrative remedies; (3) Section … that the petitioner has been prejudiced by a zoning 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

Pioneer Oil Company, Inc. v. ECC Bethany, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 9, 2025

App. 1985) (observing that a land owner “owns all of the oil beneath the surface of his acreage” but “only in a qualified sense” because of “the fugitive nature of oil, which can flow from and to adjoining … we are cognizant of the fact that there is a certain amount of reasonable and necessary waste incident to the production of oil and gas to which the non-liability rule must also apply, we do not think this immunity

James Bogner v. Teresa Bogner

29 N.E.3d 733 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 28, 2015

The order will only be set aside if clearly erroneous. … of the Guidelines “had intended for non-overnight visits in which the noncustodial parent provides the children with transportation from school and to and from their activities, feeds them, and does homework with them to qualify

Green v. State

676 N.E.2d 755 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 30, 1996

As Shadwick, supra, makes clear, neutrality and detachment clearly entail severance from law enforcement. … Such clearly is not the law. Id. at 881 (emphasis added).

State v. Thomas

827 N.E.2d 577 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 18, 2005

An abuse of discretion occurs if "the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances." - Pierce v. State, 705 N.E.2d 173, 175 (Ind.1998). … Thus, the possession offense qualifies as a "prior unrelated" conviction.

Jenney Electric Co. v. Branham

33 L.R.A. 395 · Indiana Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1895

The appellee’s contention is that the evidence was admissible to prove the knowledge of the witness as to the rate of commission paid for such services, and as qualifying him to testify as to the value of such services. … Congdon, supra, it was held that evidence of an agreement that for the work done the plaintiff should receive a sum stated, was “clearly competent, as tending to show the value of the work and labor done.”

Joseph Chapo v. Jefferson County Plan Commission

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 2023

[26] But the Chapos’ reliance on the ISRPA fares no better even if we assume their original personal shooting range qualified as a “shooting range” under the ISRPA. … “An abuse of discretion occurs when the court’s decision either clearly contravenes the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances or misinterprets the law.” River Ridge Dev. Auth. V.

Max Yanoff v. Glenn Muncy etal

Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 18, 1998

These will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. Ind. Trial Rule 52(A). The findings are clearly erroneous only when a review of the record leaves the appellate court firmly convinced a mistake has been made. … As a general rule, an express condition must be fulfilled or no liability can arise on the promise that the condition qualifies. 5 Williston, Contracts § 675 (3rd ed. 1961); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 225 (1981)

Karczewski v. Ford Motor Company

382 F. Supp. 1346 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 10, 1974

The burden established in Becker v. Coca Cola Bottling Works, 132 Ind.App. 390 , 177 N.E.2d 759 (1961), was clearly met. … It is without substantial dispute that the defendant qualifies as a seller and that the plaintiff qualifies as a buyer in this case.

United Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. Hanley

172 Ind. App. 329 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 28, 1977

The Court decided the household exclusion left Allen Hanley uninsured, and Claimant therefore qualified for uninsured motorist protection. … The exclusion from the policy coverage of damage caused by the operation of insured automobiles was, clearly, not pro *337 hibited by the statute, and the terms of the contract between the insurer and its policyholder should

Brant v. Custom Design Constructors Corp.

677 N.E.2d 92 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 1997

In deciding whether to grant an application for primary plat approval under this scheme, the commission is required to “determine if the plat or subdivision qualifies for primary approval under the standards prescribed by … This section clearly states that the commission “may” authorize a variance as opposed to “must” or “shall.” Thus, the decision to authorize the variance was within the discretion of the commission.

Henning v. Hill

80 Ind. App. 363 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 5, 1923

reward for the finding or procuring, by one person, of a purchaser for the real estate of another shall be valid, unless the same shall be in writing, signed by the owner of such real estate or his legally appointed and duly qualified … encroach upon the domain of that branch of the government if they characterize a transaction as invalid because it is contrary to public policy, unless the trans *371 action contravenes some positive statute or some well established