Case law

Z.G. v. Marion County Department of Child Services

933 N.E.2d 494 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 2010

Consequently, Ordower, Duran, and Martinez did not qualify as de facto custodians when DCS took custody of C.G. … Dalton testified that if she determines that she is not qualified to work with C.G. on sexual abuse issues, she will refer C.G. to another therapist.

Harter v. University of Indianapolis

5 F. Supp. 2d 657 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 23, 1998

At the same time, the division in roles between attorney and witness is a vital and well established requirement of professional conduct. … Rhay, 68 F.R.D. 574, 581 (E.D.Wash.1975) (by pleading affirmative defense of good faith qualified immunity in civil rights case, defendants implicitly waived privilege as to legal advice provided by the state’s attorney general

Malenchik v. State

928 N.E.2d 564 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2010

We initially observe that the trial court's sentencing decision was clearly based on factors apart from the defendant's LSI-R and SASSI results. … The fact that numerical results from such tools may reflect factors that are separately shown by other evidence at sentencing does not dis- qualify the test results as duplicative.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of K.C., Mother, D.C., Father, and D.C., D'A.C., Da.C., and K.C., Children, K.C. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 12, 2019

Specifically, Mother asserts that the exhibits did not qualify as business records and were, therefore, not admissible under that exception. … [37] Based on the record before us, we cannot say that the juvenile court’s termination of Mother’s parental rights to Children was clearly erroneous.

Mark Goley v. The White Barn Venue, LLC, and Madison City Board of Zoning Appeals (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 15, 2019

is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … the same factors and circumstances and reached a different decision. 6 6 Intervenors argue that White Barn’s application for a conditional use permit should have been denied because it qualified

Amer. Bridge Co. v. Rev. Bd., Emp. SEC. Div.

121 Ind. App. 576 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 1951

All of the foregoing cases are clearly distinguishable from the case at bar. … The unemployment compensation reserves established thereunder should be used for the payment of benefits to those who come within the objective of the Act.

Routes v. Henderson

58 F. Supp. 2d 959 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 21, 1999

A letter of warning is the first official step in the progressive discipline system established by the CBA between the USPS and the Union. Ex. 42, CBA at 109. … Regardless of the language used, Gould’s message that he did not want Routes to return to work at the post office was clearly communicated to Routes. 36.After receiving the second letter from Dr.

Davis v. Garrett

887 N.E.2d 942 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 15, 2008

Therefore, we reject Garrett’s assertion that the statements in the police report qualified as present sense impressions. … Even though this witness may not have said that but we established that with Mr. Helms. There’s two stop signs at each one of these areas. The Court: Response. Mr.

Knight & Jillson Co. v. Castle

172 Ind. 97 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1909

in which to apply the equities and presumptions of the established law of surety-ship. … Benton, supra, the court said: “The contract on which this suit is brought was clearly a contract of guaranty. It was so declared upon its face, and such is its import.

Neal v. State

214 Ind. 328 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 27, 1938

The provisions of § 2-1430 Burns 1933, § 2223-1 Baldwin's 1937 Supp., Acts of 1937, Ch. 85, relating to certification to the clerk of the Supreme Court upon failure of a special judge to qualify, can have no application here … In support of this proposition it is urged that to sustain the second count of the indictment (murder in the perpetration of a robbery) it was incumbent on the state to establish that appellants were actually committing the

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Successor in interest to The Money Store Investment Corp., f/d/b/a First Union Small Business Capital v. Neal A. Summers

974 N.E.2d 488 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 27, 2012

Summers was gone and Money Store did not qualify a 5 receiver or enter the property to secure its interests. … Findings will only be set aside if they are clearly erroneous.

Lytle v. Ford Motor Co.

814 N.E.2d 301 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 7, 2004

we first note the provisions of Indiana Evidence Rule 702; ' If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence 'or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified … Such an abuse occurs when the trial court's decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and cireumstances of the case, or if it misinterprets the law. Vernon v.

Scott A. Steffey v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 13, 2020

Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Feb 13 2020, 1:38 pm court except for the purpose of establishing … An abuse of discretion occurs “when admission is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances.” Id.

Indiana State Board of Public Welfare v. Tioga Pines Living Center, Inc.

622 N.E.2d 935 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 29, 1993

With respect to the GNP/ipd annual rate limiter, the illegality upon which the judgment is based is clearly substantive. A. … Clearly there is a preference implicit in the very concept of official government action of live personal participation by public officials.

Atlantic Casualty Insurance Co. v. Garcia

227 F. Supp. 3d 990 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 5, 2017

.”); DE 23-12 (“The cause of the contamination is clearly the dry cleaning operations in which [the dry cleaners’ owners] engaged for many years ...”). … The nature of the claim, not the merit, establishes the insurer’s duty to defend. Trisler, 575 N.E.2d at 1023 . III.

Anthony J. Rhea v. Marjorie Rhea (mem.dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 31, 2017

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any FILED court except for the purpose of establishing May 31 2017, … Even assuming Moores is qualified and competent to conduct a property-specific appraisal, he did not perform that function here.

Schools v. Sebelius

988 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 27, 2013

: annual well-woman visits; screening for gestational diabetes and breast-feeding support, supplies, and counseling; human papillomavirus screening; screening and counseling for sexually transmitted infections and human immune-deficiency … employees and students (to comply with their own religious tenants and to avoid the ACA’s fines for failing to meet coverage requirements), then they must either directly provide contraceptive services themselves (which are clearly

Strong v. Delaware County

976 F. Supp. 2d 1038 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2013

Brooke are qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education, nor has he shown that their reasoning and methodologies are reliable. See Ervin v. … “Even an employer’s erroneous decision making, exhibiting poor business judgment, is not sufficient to establish pretext.” Abioye v. Sundstrand Corp., 164 F.3d 364, 368 (7th Cir.1998).

Krull v. Pierce

117 Ind. App. 638 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 6, 1947

Before discussing this question it is well to have the provisions of the assignment agreement clearly in mind as it is the charter of the appellant’s rights. … If this be true we must assume that such facts were found against the appellant who had the burden of establishing them. Fletcher, etc., Trust Co. v. American State Bank, supra; Peele v.

Lee v. State

419 N.E.2d 825 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 29, 1981

At best Lee has demonstrated a subjective expectation of not being discovered; clearly not an interest which the fourth amendment was designed to protect. See Rakas v. … The remainder of Rhum’s “testimony” came during a proceeding out of the jury’s presence where Rhum made it clear he would not respond to any questions, immunity grant and direct contempt citation notwithstanding.