Case law

Leeth v. State

868 N.E.2d 65 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 14, 2007

The court may exercise this option “only if the person pleads guilty to a Class D felony that qualifies for consideration as a Class A misdemeanor under IC 35-50-2-7, and the following conditions are met....” Id. … The State argues that Leeth’s “conflicting testimony clearly established his lack of credibility, which the trial court was entitled to consider.... ” Appellee’s Br. p. 7.

Swain v. Bowers

91 Ind. App. 307 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 15, 1927

It is our duty to uphold and give effect to the will, if possible, without violating any established rules of law. … Remainders will only be held to be contingent where the intention to create such interest is clearly manifested by the words of the instrument. . . .

John Barnhart v. State of Indiana

15 N.E.3d 138 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 2014

screen administered to I.S. on the basis that the only available avenue to the defense to introduce such evidence was via hearsay, the test did not meet the scientific reliability standards set forth in Daubert, no witness qualified … An abuse of discretion occurs where the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances presented. Id.

State v. Nixon

270 Ind. 192 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 5, 1979

Therefore the asserted mootness, the immunity of the injunction against the Governor from review, does not exist. *154 City of Indianapolis v. … Inasmuch as the Legislature is presumed to have concluded that pari-mutuel wagering was not a lottery, it was the burden of Nixon in the trial court to establish clearly that such wagering was within the constitutional prohibition

In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of B.E. and A.M. (Minor Children) and S.E. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2019

(D.O.B. 9-20-2012) and his natural father, [R.M.],[13] and natural mother, [S.E.], is hereby terminated and all rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties and obligations, including the right to … The trial court did not clearly err when it terminated Mother’s parental rights to Children.

In re the Adoption of K.D.D., Minor Child, K.H. and S.H. v. G.D. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2020

The trial court’s findings and judgment will be set aside only if they are clearly erroneous. E.B.F., 93 N.E.3d at 762. … A judgment is clearly erroneous when there is no evidence supporting the findings or the findings fail to support the judgment. Id.

Board of Trustees v. Brooks

784 N.E.2d 1035 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 17, 2003

We will only disturb the trial court's findings and judgment if they are clearly erroneous. Id. … For a petition to be sufficient it "must be verified under oath by at least one (1) qualified petitioner in a manner prescribed by the state board of accounts before the petition is filed with the county auditor."

LHO Indianapolis One Lessee, LLC v. Esther Bowman, Individually and on Behalf of Other Similarly Situated Individuals

40 N.E.3d 1264 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 2015

An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law, or an improper application of law and fact. … To prevail on a claim, the class will have to establish both generic and individual causation. Id.

Lester v. Hinkle

90 Ind. App. 193 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 3, 1926

says that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the finding of the court, in that, it wholly failed to show any personal liability on the part of appellant to appellee under the contract sued upon, but, on the contrary, established … E. 426: “It is well settled that where books, records, and papers, which might properly be used in evidence, are numerous or voluminous, it is competent for any qualified person who has examined them to testify as to the'

Graham Creek Farms v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

819 N.E.2d 151 · Indiana Tax Court · Dec 13, 2004

Accordingly, Graham bears the burden of showing how the items it purchased clearly fall within the exemption statute. See Foursquare Tabernacle Church of God in Christ v. … Therefore, the backhoe does not qualify as exempt equipment and the repair part is taxable.

D.B.M. v. State Ex Rel. A.R.

702 N.E.2d 355 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 1998

A child support order is clearly erroneous if it is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances that were before the trial court. McGinley-Ellis v. Ellis, 638 N.E.2d 1249, 1252 (Ind.1994). I. … Use of the qualifying language “if pursued and applied for” means that the income is contingent upon Father’s initiatives.

Krisean Porter v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 2020

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Dec 08 2020, 8:48 am court except for the purpose of establishing … Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-2777 | December 8, 2020 Page 9 of 16 [18] Similarly, we conclude that Proposed Jury Instruction 6’s failure to include the qualifying statement of “[u]

Johnson v. State

472 N.E.2d 892 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1985

Varon, Searches Seizures and Immunities 876 (1974). … The record clearly shows that defendants had not dem *907 onstrated that their peremptory challenges were exhausted.

Kenyonn Sincere v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 29, 2024

“More specifically, the defendant must establish not only the grounds for the misconduct but also the additional grounds for fundamental error.” Id. … statute, claiming that [b]y claiming that the State had to disprove that Sincere was a law enforcement officer, Sincere appears to be suggesting that there is some sort of immunity

Reynolds Metals Co. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue, Gross Income Tax Division

433 N.E.2d 1 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 1982

Clearly, Reynolds’ presence in Indiana for this purpose is established by its numerous sales offices and salesmen, warehouse facilities with the attendant employees, property, manufacturing plant, and sales in the audit period … Clearly a ‘nexus’ with the state has been established with regard to non-house account sales in the southern ter *12 ritory. General Motors Corp. v. Washington, supra.” 255 Ind. at 536-37 , 265 N.E.2d 704 .

Victor Ponce v. State of Indiana

992 N.E.2d 726 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 7, 2013

Although qualified as an expert, Mr. Courtright cannot speculate on what Petitioner did and did not understand. Moreover, Ms. … Although we do not defer to the post-conviction court’s legal conclusions, we review the post-conviction court’s factual findings under a 6 clearly erroneous standard. Id.

McInnis v. Veterans Village

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 28, 2023

The dispute here does not center around whether McInnis qualifies as a disabled veteran. It seems apparent from the filings that he earned that status, and therefore lived at Veterans Village. … is also available to the subordinate.”) 4 The City’s motion argues that McInnis “has not met his burden to establish standing.”

Infinity Products, Inc. v. Quandt

810 N.E.2d 1028 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 29, 2004

We will not disturb the trial court's findings or judgment unless they are clearly erroneous. … Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when the record lacks any reasonable inference from the evidence to support them, and the trial court's judgment is clearly erroneous if

Cundiff v. Schmitt Development Co.

649 N.E.2d 1063 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 28, 1995

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 pre-seribed by … The record clearly demonstrates that the Commission did not vote to adopt any written findings of fact, as an administrative body, at its October meeting.

Graves Trucking, Inc. v. B. G. Trucking Co.

151 Ind. App. 563 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 11, 1972

commission shall, after hearing ascertain and determine that the proposed operation, as requested in the application, meets all of the requirements of contract carriage, as defined in this act; and that the applicant is qualified … Hopkin’s testimony has obviously established nothing.