Case law

Harris v. Second National Bank of Hamilton

146 Ind. App. 468 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 1, 1970

Upon the death of Edith Weber in February 1966, the appellee was duly appointed and qualified as the executor of her estate, and acting in that capacity filed its complaint against appellant to recover $45,393.39 allegedly … The court, in upholding the right of the devisees to give testimony, stated: “If the action is an action properly brought by the executor to recover, as such, on behalf of the estate of its decedent, then it is clearly established

Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana

121 N.E.3d 1053 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 5, 2019

further probative evidence establishing otherwise.” … The statute is written in the present tense, and it has no qualifying language, such as that he must prove that he “is no longer dangerous” or that the circumstances that led to him being found dangerous in the past have

Strauss v. Carpenter

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

“To establish the existence of a conspiracy, a plaintiff must show that the conspirators agreed to inflict 2 The City does not present any argument that the identical § 1983 claim against it, separately pled in Count … The Indiana Tort Claims Act provides immunity from tort liability to government employees acting within the scope of their employment. I.C. 34-13-3-5(a).

Stump v. Commercial Union

601 N.E.2d 327 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 19, 1992

Consequently, this court found that the defendant's argument that the plaintiff's claims were precluded by the Worker's Compensation Act was erroneous as the Act clearly was not meant to provide a license to insurance companies … The relationship of the compensation insurance carrier to the employer should not afford it special immunity.

Beaver v. Foamcraft, Inc.

181 F. Supp. 2d 968 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 7, 2002

The burden of establishing a lack of any genuine issue of material fact rests on the movants. Wollin v. Gondert, 192 F.3d 616, 621-22 (7th Cir.1999); Essex v. … The nonmovants, however, must make a showing sufficient to establish any essential element for which they will bear the burden of proof at trial. Celotex Corp. v.

Chami v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance

188 F. Supp. 2d 1084 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 5, 2002

A secondary objective of ERISA is to provide employers with an incentive to establish and maintain employee benefits plans. … Since diversity jurisdiction clearly exists in this action, the matter presently before the court has no jurisdictional implications. 6 . This part of the Demars opinion is dictum.

Elbert Briggs v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 2020

Parker was asked about that statement at trial, where the State called her as a witness under a grant of use immunity. … The admission of evidence constitutes an abuse of discretion when it is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id. at 568. A.

Creager v. State

737 N.E.2d 771 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 17, 2000

Therefore, Patrick’s children are clearly “victims” entitled to restitution under the statute. … We note initially that the Code of Judicial Conduct establishes standards for the ethical conduct of judges.

Matter of YDR

567 N.E.2d 872 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 14, 1991

We may not set aside the findings or judgment unless clearly erroneous. In the Matter of D.T., 547 N.E.2d at 284 . … In part, she contests the evidence establishing that her boyfriend was the person named in the judgment of conviction.

McCarty v. Sanders

805 N.E.2d 894 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 7, 2004

recoverable for "an injury or death of a patient" may not exceed $750,000.00 for an act of malpractice that occurred during the time period at issue. 1 During the time period at issue, Ind.Code § 34-18-14-8(b) provided that a qualified … Jacob's filing of a petition demanding payment of damages from the Fund is sufficient to establish his standing as a "claimant" under the statute.

In Re Vale

110 B.R. 396 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 23, 1989

Any person whose views are to the contrary has the burden of establishing that Congress was in error.) … The Court held that guns, bows and arrows, cameras, golf clubs, and a bicycle qualified as “household goods”. In Oswald v.

Garner v. State

754 N.E.2d 984 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 2001

Reliability may be inferred if a statement falls within a firmly rooted hearsay exception or in the event the hearsay exception warrants admission, but if the exception fails to qualify as firmly rooted, the State must show … An allegation that the trial court failed to identify or find a mitigating circumstance requires the defendant to establish that the mitigating evidence is both significant and clearly supported by the record. Id.

Porter v. Porter

526 N.E.2d 219 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 1988

The trial court's determination is not clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Chestnut, supra. … Reviewing the record, Norkus's testimony clearly was in rebuttal to Alerding's earlier testimony. Norkus was found qualified to testify as an expert in evaluating small businesses.

In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: X.S. (Minor Child), and S.S. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, and Lake County Court Appointed Special Advocate (mem. dec.)

117 N.E.3d 601 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 26, 2018

“Findings of fact are clearly erroneous only when the record lacks any evidence or reasonable inferences to support them.” Id. … The order clearly states that Father did indeed request an attorney.

Independent Distributors Cooperative USA v. Advanced Insurance Brokerage of America, Inc.

264 F. Supp. 2d 796 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 29, 2003

IDC alleges that AIA’s recommended design, in which the Plan qualified as an MEWA, constituted a breach of contract. … The 1996 Agreement also established AIA as the third-party administrator of the Plan.

Hunter v. Burnsville Turnpike Co.

56 Ind. 213 · Indiana Supreme Court · May 15, 1877

or purchasers “ shall have the right, by such name as he or they may assume, to hold, own and possess the road, or [the] part thereof so purchased, and to have and enjoy all the *219 rights, privileges, franchises, and immunities … The cases cited by the counsel clearly show the power of courts in the correction of errors committed by their clerks in judicial writs.” In Purcell v.

City of Terre Haute v. Kersey

159 Ind. 300 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1902

it deprives them of the free use of their property, and of the free use of the public streets of said city, in contravention of §§1, 21, and 23 of article 1 of the State’s Constitution; (2) that it grants privileges and immunities … When such power is, however, clearly conferred upon such municipalities, courts have generally upheld the proper exercise thereof.

Marquis T. Wilcox v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 2018

Wilcox claimed that he “would have insisted on going to trial” if his trial counsel had properly advised him regarding credit time for which he qualified if convicted. Appellant’s App. Vol. I p. 50. … The post-conviction court’s finding is not clearly erroneous.

Talley-Smith

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 10, 2025

Specifically, “[a] Rule 59(e) motion will be successful only where the movant clearly establishes ‘(1) that the court committed a manifest error of law or fact, or (2) that newly discovered evidence precluded entry of … procedural due process was overlooked, however, the Court directs Plaintiff to [DE 42 at 5-6], where that claim is addressed and reminds him that “[a] public official or employee is entitled to quasi-judicial absolute immunity

Miles v. Neal

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 6, 2022

Qualified Immunity. … Rettele, 550 U.S. 609, 616 (2007) (once the court determines there to be no constitutional violation, “there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity”); Chavez v.