Case law

Leone v. COM'R, BUREAU OF MOTOR VEHICLES

933 N.E.2d 1244 · Indiana Supreme Court · Sep 10, 2010

Public Interest Finally, the public interest element of the law on injunctions clearly favors the Bureau. … Requiring the Bureau to recognize names without verification would just as clearly disserve that interest.

Weaver v. State

627 N.E.2d 1311 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 18, 1994

The defendant has the burden of establishing a factual predicate for the defense of voluntary intoxication. … Thus, the State had the burden of establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not so intoxicated as to negate his ability to form the required intent. Powers v.

In Re Arcella-Coffman

318 B.R. 463 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 8, 2004

Based upon the Court’s view of applicable law, and the record in this case, the debtor does not qualify for Chapter 13 relief; no further submissions from the parties are necessary. … Clearly, focusing solely on the damage element of a monetary cause of action begs the question, and the definition, of “debt”, both as used in § 101(12) and in § 109(e).

Wiseman v. Wiseman (In Re Wiseman)

351 B.R. 651 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 29, 2006

Noeldner opined that it would not qualify for additional lending and it could not afford to pay $30,000 a year for a new employee or for *657 an individual debt to Heidi. … He also stated that James could not personally afford to pay $30,000 a year and would not qualify for a loan. He stated that James reaffirmed his debt to TCU.

RAINSBERGER v. BENNER

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 18, 2019

On February 7, 2019 the Seventh Circuit issued a mandate affirming the district court’s determination that Benner is not entitled to qualified immunity in this action for malicious prosecution filed by Plaintiff … Second, the methods Benner employed in investigating Ruth’s murder are not immune to standard or accepted practices.

David A Gertz v. Porter County Assessor

Indiana Tax Court · Feb 3, 2026

At no point does Gertz clearly articulate to the Court an alternative true tax value that the Board should have selected or, more importantly, show how the record evidence establishes that value. … Gertz has not presented and explained probative evidence establishing the property’s market value-in-use.

Robert L. McCoy v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 2020

The statute enumerates several offenses that qualify as a serious violent felony, including robbery, in I.C. §§ 35-47-4-5(b)(13); 35-42-5-1. … Two other officers testified that the video clearly depicted McCoy removing the firearm from his waistband and placing it in the basket.

Pulos v. James

261 Ind. 279 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1973

“Section 23: 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.” … The court clearly had jurisdiction of contracts between the parties and equitable jurisdiction to issue an injunction under the. circumstances alleged.

Hoosier Mountain Bike Association, Inc., City of Indianapolis, and Indy Parks and Recreation v. Richard Kaler

73 N.E.3d 712 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 2017

Addressing Burrell’s first element—unreasonable risk of harm—the Pfenning court reasoned that “the risk of a person on a golf course being struck by a golf ball does not qualify as the Court of … It was clearly visible that there was no back railing for spectators Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A04-1604-CT-865 | March 23, 2017 Page 12 of 14  sitting on the top row, but Funston leaned back

Henry v. Moberly

23 Ind. App. 305 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 1, 1898

To better understand the merits of the controversy here presented, we deem it necessary to state some facts disclosed by the evidence which do not clearly appear from the special verdict. … required to do so, but may introduce affirmative evidence of such falsity in cases where malice must be expressly shown, as a step in the proof of malice; ■ but that the falsity .of the charge is not in itself sufficient to establish

Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corp. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

598 N.E.2d 647 · Indiana Tax Court · Aug 19, 1992

Transmission of electricity is clearly within the sale transaction, and the expert testimony supports the Department's claim that some electricity generated at IKEC travels completely within Indiana to IM and SIGECO. … Electricity qualifies as "goods" within the meaning of the UCC. Helvey v. Wabash County REMC (1972), 151 Ind.App. 176, 179 , 278 N.E.2d 608, 610 . 7 .

J.S. v. W.K. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 2016

Courts of appeal ‘shall not set aside the findings or judgment unless clearly erroneous.’” Id. (quoting Ind. Trial Rule 52(A)). … Father has not demonstrated that the trial court’s order is clearly erroneous.

Filippo v. Lee Publications, Inc.

485 F. Supp. 2d 969 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 30, 2007

A: Because I think that he clearly, as it’s demonstrated here, should identify himself. … But that would be clearly understood going into it. Q: But it could be a concern. A: It could be.

Washel v. Bryant

770 N.E.2d 902 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2002

We will not set aside the trial court's findings unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. Findings are clearly erroneous when the record *905 lacks any facts or reasonable inferences to support them. Id. … The breach of a contract does not by itself establish the damages that must be shown to bring an action for breach of contract. See, e.g., Rogier v.

American National Bank & Trust Co. v. St. Joseph Valley Bank

180 Ind. App. 546 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 22, 1979

The rights and liabilities of parties with respect to commercial paper are established in articles three and four of the Uniform Commercial Code, IC 1971, 26-1-3-101 et seq. and 26-1 — 4-101 et seq. … Joseph’s claim against John on the basis of his indorser’s contract and transfer warranty is clearly without merit.

Burris v. State

465 N.E.2d 171 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1984

Louisiana] clearly establishes that the ‘venires from which juries are drawn must not systematically exclude distinctive groups in the community and thereby fail to be reasonably representative thereof.’ … Although it is probable that he spent other nights there, Burris had not shown how often or how long, and clearly failed to establish that he “lived” in Debra Wilkins’ apartment.

In re the Paternity of E.E., J.E. v. T.C. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 2016

[3] On September 14, 2011, Father filed a Petition to Establish Paternity and for Emergency Custody. … Findings will be set aside if they are clearly erroneous. Id. Findings are clearly erroneous only when the record contains no facts to support them either directly or by inference. Id.

J.S. v. W.K.

62 N.E.3d 1 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 2016

Courts of appeal ‘shall not set aside the findings or judgment unless clearly erroneous.’ ” Id. (quoting Ind. Trial Rule 52(A)). … Father has not demonstrated that the trial court’s order is clearly erroneous.

Kenneth Lancaster v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 14, 2020

• Firearms analysis established that at least one of the weapons used in the murders was a nine-millimeter semi-automatic gun. … Strictly speaking, therefore, Lancaster is correct that Mark’s age did not qualify as a statutory aggravator, which requires the victim to have been sixty-five years or older at the time of the offense.

Jerry Cooper v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 4, 2014

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of Feb 04 2014, 10:19 am establishing the defense of … She clearly and repeatedly stated that Cooper threw the gun in her lap after he panicked when Officer Lichtsinn initiated the traffic stop.