Case law

Collins v. Hall

991 F. Supp. 1065 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 23, 1997

While this purpose is clear, much is unclear: no clearly defined criteria determined whose names would appear on the list; there was no established length of time during which one’s name would remain on the list; no procedure … Ascertaining and applying Indiana law of defamation, along with its privileges, exceptions and immunities, to the facts before the court is hardly “within [the] ‘no brainer’ exception to the duty to relinquish federal jurisdiction

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of O.A. (Minor Child) and Z.O. (Father) Z.O. (Father) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 2020

“Findings are clearly erroneous only when the record contains no facts to support them either directly or by inference.” Quillen v. … Kristina Stewart from Valley Oaks, who completed [F]ather’s substance use/mental health assessment testified that she was qualified to work with Father on mental health issues and that the facility

Hunt v. Reagle

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 11, 2023

Our cases have established that the ‘irreducible constitutional minimum’ of standing consists of three elements. … The plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears the burden of establishing these elements.

Kalwitz v. Estates of Kalwitz

759 N.E.2d 228 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 26, 2001

In addition, the Estates introduced into evidence Obed, Sr. and Helen's depositions given during the LPCA litigation, which clearly waive the Dead Man's statute. 4 See I.C. § 34-45-24. … In other words, the statute does not provide that only depositions taken in the instant litigation will qualify.

Williams v. State

555 N.E.2d 133 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1990

The admission of a relevant photograph becomes reversible error only if its tendency to inflame the passions of the jury due to its gruesomeness clearly outweighs its relevancy. Stamps, 515 N.E.2d 507 . … Where, however, taking into consideration the good character of the accused, guilt is established, then conviction must follow. The trial court did not err in refusing the defendant's tendered instruction No. 3.

City of South Bend v. Martin

29 L.R.A. 531 · Indiana Supreme Court · Sep 17, 1895

Martin, entitled: ‘ ‘An ordinance concerning the licensing of certain extraordinary trades and establishments. Passed December 11, 1893. Amended August 28, 1894.” … without a license, was held void, both because it violated section 23 of article 1 of the State constitution, which provides that: “The general assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities

Cagle v. Flick

3 F. Supp. 2d 982 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 30, 1998

Thus, a suit in which a *989 medical provider may claim recovery through subrogation does not qualify. … Clearly, the equities do not weigh in favor of the Flicks.

Burritt v. Marzolf

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 9, 2024

1915A, I must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … This complaint provides no basis for finding equitable tolling, but it clearly alleges facts showing the case was filed after the statute of limitations expired.

Associated Insurance Companies, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

655 N.E.2d 1271 · Indiana Tax Court · Sep 29, 1995

The language which the Department cites does not clearly indicate that the legislature intended to depart from its "single taxpayer" policy. … Const. § 47.33 (5th Ed.1992) ("[rleferential and qualifying words and phrases, where no contrary intention appears, refer solely to the last antecedent.")

Town of Ellettsville, Indiana Plan Commission and Richland Convenience Store Partners, LLC. v. Joseph v. DeSpirito

78 N.E.3d 666 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 25, 2017

Section 153.003(B) states, “When it is clearly in the [town’s] interest that a parcel should not be developed through further subdivision, the Planning Commission may reject a primary plat.” … In Thomas, this Court quoted that rule in affirming the dismissal of a complaint to establish an easement by necessity for failure to state a claim. See 30 Ind.

Musser v. State

157 Ind. 423 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1901

The evidence objected to, however, was clearly proper for another purpose. … As stated above, tbe evidence in our opinion amply established the conspiracy and acting together of the parties in the crime.

PEDEN v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 6, 2024

American Access has clearly articulated in their motion that their intervention is necessary as there is a dispute of fact whether Defendant Jose Pichardo Lopez qualifies as insured under American Access's policies. … Therefore, the proponent of the stay has the burden of clearly establishing the need for the Court to grant the motion. Landis at 255.

Terry Smith v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 2016

Therefore, in order to prevail, a petitioner must establish his claims by a preponderance of the evidence. Ind. … We therefore accept the post-conviction court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous but give no deference to its conclusions of law. Id. I.

Bonzani v. Goshen Health System Inc

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 10, 2022

Pleading Standards and Immunity. … for immunity under the HCQIA.

Lockhart v. United States

961 F. Supp. 1260 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 17, 1997

As the Government admits in its motion, the FTCA represents a limited waiver of the United States’ immunity from suit permitting a district court to exercise subject matter jurisdiction over claims for money damages based … An exception to this rule, not applicable here, exists when the facts required to establish jurisdiction are coextensive with those necessary to prevail on the merits. Peckmann v.

In re the Matter of N.T. (Minor Child) and D.T. (Father) and K.J. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 2020

The Court found her to be qualified as an expert in dietetics. 25. … The court qualified her as an expert witness in the areas of pediatrics and child abuse pediatrics. 59. During [Child’s] admission at St. Vincent, Dr.

Rowe v. State

539 N.E.2d 474 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1989

In the case at bar, the following instance-es are cited by appellant as examples of the trial court's "misconduct": 1) qualifying sua sponte a police officer witness as competent to relate the street price of cocaine in response … At trial, a defendant bears the burden of establishing his insanity defense by a preponderance of the evidence. Ind.Code § 35-41-4-1(b).

McNay v. Town of Lowell

41 Ind. App. 627 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 12, 1908

Appellee, an incorporated town, sued appellant to recover money that appellant had received from the town for coal furnished and labor performed while appellant was a duly qualified and acting member of the board of trustees … Courts' are but human, and we are prone to let our sympathy for the one who, with honest motives, has subjected himself to heavy pecuniary loss, lead us to relax the rigors of established legal principles.

Indiana Department of State Revenue v. Indiana Gamma Gamma of Alpha Tau Omega, Inc.

181 Ind. App. 664 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 28, 1979

trial court’s finding that ATO is exempt under the above language from collecting the gross retail tax on its food sales to students is necessary to preserve the constitutionality of the exemption under the privileges and immunities … None of this is relevant here, however, because the student purchases of food from ATO are clearly retail purchases for immediate consumption. 14 .

Clark County Assessor v. Meijer Stores LP

119 N.E.3d 634 · Indiana Tax Court · Feb 8, 2019

In it, the Indiana Board explained that because both Meijer and the Assessor presented USPAP-compliant appraisals from qualified experts, it needed to weigh the competing appraisals and determine which one was more persuasive … Tax Ct. 2010) (explaining that the Indiana Board abuses its discretion when it either misinterprets the law or when its final determination is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before