Case law

State of Indiana, Acting on Behalf of the Indiana Family & Social Services Administration v. International Business Machines Corporation

51 N.E.3d 150 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 22, 2016

We may not set aside the findings or judgment unless they are clearly erroneous. Menard, Inc. v. Dage–MTI, Inc., 726 N.E.2d 1206, 1210 (Ind. 2000), reh'g denied (citation omitted). … “Findings are clearly erroneous only when the record contains no facts to support them either directly or by inference.” Quillen v. Quillen, 671 N.E.2d 98, 102 (Ind. 1996).

MEGA OIL, INC. v. CITATION 2004 INVESTMENT LLC

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 17, 2023

In footnote five of its brief supporting its motion for partial summary judgment, Citation qualified its use of the phrase “law of the cases,” stating: Plaintiff acknowledges that this Court … Such extraordinary circumstances clearly do not apply here. Id. (citation omitted).

Jones v. Griffith

688 F. Supp. 446 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 25, 1988

Texas, the Court noted, had established a system for thorough state court review of the Commission’s orders. … Canterbury contains a lengthy and exceedingly thoughtful discussion of the doctrine of informed consent and clearly articulates the plaintiff’s position in this case—that lay witness testimony can competently establish a

Williams v. United Technologies Carrier Corp.

310 F. Supp. 2d 1002 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 25, 2004

With respect to its counterclaims, Carrier argues that the undisputed facts clearly establish that summary judgment should be granted in its favor on each counterclaim, i.e. breach of contract, conversion and unjust enrichment … does not constitute evidence of pretext “unless those differences are so favorable to the plaintiff that there can be no dispute among reasonable persons of impartial judgment that the plaintiff was clearly better qualified

Jeff West v. J. Greg Allen Builder, Inc., and Princeton Homes, and Greg Allen

92 N.E.3d 634 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 2017

All of these funds were transferred directly from Princeton to GABI, in contravention of established company policy. … This is, perhaps, because the allegations against West seem to clearly qualify as libel per se.

DM v. State

949 N.E.2d 327 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 22, 2011

Lastly, the waiver section does not clearly indicate that both the juvenile and the parent are required to waive the juvenile‟s rights. … But the form could more clearly indicate the parent‟s role.

Kranz v. Meyers Subdivision Property Owners Ass'n

969 N.E.2d 1068 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2012

We do not reverse the agency’s decision unless the action is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … See also Ind.Code § 14-10-1-1 (establishing the NRC). 2 .

Jarred L. Eib v. State Employees' Appeals Commission, Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 22, 2020

action only if it is (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … We will affirm the agency’s judgment unless it is clearly erroneous. Id.

Marlett v. State

878 N.E.2d 860 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 2007

Making schools free from violence or the fear of violence clearly is an important societal concern. … Furthermore, even if there is some evidence that Marlett is sexually aroused by knives and/or violence, that by itself does not establish that he is an SVP.

Robert A. Wilson, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 24, 2020

An abuse of discretion occurs where the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it. Id. … In addition, there is no evidence in the record that Wilson qualified for the sanction he now seeks.

Garvin, Rec. v. Chadwick Realty Corp.

212 Ind. 499 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1937

Garvin, receiver of said bank to liquidate the assets and adjust the affairs thereof and said appellant is now the duly appointed, qualified, and acting receiver of said insolvent. … The Act clearly applies either when a bank has been adjudicated insolvent, when it suspends business, or when it is in the course of liquidation.

Chavez v. State

722 N.E.2d 885 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 2000

Several witnesses, including McGlothlin, Voorhees, Seabolt, Hoskins, and Byrd were granted use immunity to testify against Arturo. … Such a situation is absurd and clearly not what Congress intended. Id., 471 U.S. at 785-86 , 105 S.Ct. at 2415 , 85 L.Ed.2d 764 .

In the Matter of: A v. & E v. (Children Alleged to be in Need of Services) and A.P. (Mother) A.P. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 11, 2018

We may not set aside the findings or judgment unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. … The doctor’s decision to second- guess Mother’s care does not establish a CHINS.” (Id.

Evans v. Murray

815 N.E.2d 216 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2004

In November 2002, Father filed an action to establish paternity of M.A.S. On January 8, 2003, Stepfather filed a petition to adopt M.A.S., and Father objected to Stepfather's petition. … An abuse of discretion occurs if the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and the cireumstances. In re A.C., 770 N.E.2d 947 , 951 (Ind.Ct.App.2002).

Williams v. Anderson

174 F. Supp. 2d 843 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 19, 2001

established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” or (2) “involved an unreasonable application of ... clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States … Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) “qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’ ” Williams, 120 S.Ct. at 1512 .

Johnson v. State

879 N.E.2d 649 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 25, 2008

We will reverse a trial court’s decision only for an abuse of discretion, which occurs when the court’s action is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it. Id. … Based upon the foregoing, and the fact that our state legislature has neither invalidated Indiana Code section 9-30-6-5(c)(l) nor qualified its application, we reject Johnson’s contention that the trial court erred by admitting

Houser v. Kaufman

972 N.E.2d 927 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 10, 2012

The doctor had given the patient immunizations that the doctor knew repeatedly caused the patient to lose consciousness, but the doctor failed to monitor the patient for a sufficient amount of time before permitting him to … Stacy clearly made an argument based upon Martin and its progeny to the trial court and repeats that argument on appeal.

Newbill v. State

884 N.E.2d 383 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 2008

Therefore, we find that read as a whole, the instructions properly informed the jury that it was to consider the testimony and evidence presented, and to judge that evidence in order to reach its conclusion of whether the State established … An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision is clearly erroneous and against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Saunders v.

Church of the American Knights of Ku Klux Klan v. City of Gary

219 F. Supp. 2d 957 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 4, 2002

Finally, the dissenters chide the majority’s order of dismissal as “clearly dis-serving] the public interest.” … Pap’s subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because Pap’s had sold the real property upon which the establishment was located, indeed the establishment now housed a comedy club.

Simon Property Group, L.P. v. Brandt Construction, Inc.

830 N.E.2d 981 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 15, 2005

Thus, to agree with Landlord is, essentially, to say that notwithstanding the statutory requirement that a tort plaintiff must make a qualifying settlement offer to recover prejudgment interest, we will allow plaintiffs who … Similarly, in this case the Contract's indemnity provision clearly and unequivocally requires Brandt to indemnify General Partner for damage resulting from its own negligence.