Case law

Bonzani v. Goshen Health System Inc

District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 11, 2020

Bonzani’s employment agreement, established the MEC’s authority to investigate. Id. ¶ 4(g). Dr. … Similarly, the hospital is not entitled to immunity now under the Indiana Peer Review Privilege.

Munster Medical Research Foundation d/b/a Munster Community Hospital v. Melodyann Clark

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 27, 2026

[6] On February 10, the Estate sent a letter to the Hospital “tak[ing] issue with” the Hospital’s qualified response to Request 1 and objections to Requests 2 through 10. Appellant’s App. Vol. … An abuse of discretion occurs if the trial court’s decision is “clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances and the error affects a party’s substantial rights.” Jennings v.

McCullough v. Holy Cross College

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 18, 2020

Summary judgment is proper if the nonmoving party doesn’t establish the existence of an essential element on which that party bears the burden of proof at trial. Massey v. … Watts’s remaining arguments regarding sovereign immunity and qualified immunity.

Joe E. Jackson, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 2018

An abuse of discretion occurs when a decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the trial court. Id. … Here, the parties stipulated that Jackson had a prior qualifying conviction and could not lawfully possess a firearm. Tr. Vol. 2 at 75; State’s Ex. 1.

Harris v. ECP Healthcare, P.C.

954 F. Supp. 1295 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 7, 1997

treatment, and has therefore failed to establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment. … Courts have consistently held that the anti-retaliation protections of Title VII do not immunize employees from disciplinary termination for violations of company policy, irrespective of whether the violations were committed

Shidler v. Moore

446 F. Supp. 2d 942 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 9, 2006

the court 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 … They anticipated that courts would apply the Act’s standard with due deference to the experience and expertise of prison and jail administrators in establishing necessary regulations and procedures to maintain good order,

Fort Wayne Women's Health v. Board of Commissioners

735 F. Supp. 2d 1045 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 11, 2010

Because the case law is so developed on this question, no government official would be entitled to qualified immunity in a § 1983 suit if he or she conducted such an unconsented search. See Doe v. … Klopfer replies that the Indiana statute doesn’t clearly define patient records as confidential.

Bushouse v. Local Union 2209, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers

164 F. Supp. 2d 1066 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 2, 2001

Accordingly, Bus-house qualified for the Charity Option and has been provided that option since April 2001. … At least one court has concluded that the requirement under § 19 that an individual have church membership to qualify for the charity option is unconstitutional. See Wilson v.

Supreme Sitting of the Order of the Iron Hall v. Baker

20 L.R.A. 210 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 26, 1893

a court of equity will exercise such power, except when the exigencies of the case clearly warrant it; but, we think, under our statute, the court has such power when it is clearly made to appear that the exigencies of the … And whenever such a state of affairs exists, as that the corporation has proper officers qualified, and the funds of the corporation and its proper application secured, it will be the duty of the court to restore the property

Caddyshack Looper, LLC v. Long Beach Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals

22 N.E.3d 694 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2014

BZA’s action that is (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or 12 otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … The evidence establishes that the cost associated with removal of the seawall would be substantial.

Terrence T. Walker v. State of Indiana

988 N.E.2d 341 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 14, 2013

This testimony clearly violated Indiana Evidence Rule 704(b), but we cannot conclude that it deprived Walker of a fair trial. … Indeed, alternate jurors are presumed to be fair and equally qualified to the task. Jervis v. State, 679 N.E.2d 875, 881-82 (Ind. 1997) (citations omitted).

PSI Energy, Inc. v. Home Insurance Co.

801 N.E.2d 705 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 16, 2004

Further, the facts of this case are clearly distinguishable from *730 those in Herman, where the insured discharged a lethal weapon into a crowd of people. … We will reverse the trial court only if its decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id.

Estate of Ballard v. Ballard

434 N.E.2d 136 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 27, 1982

Not all testimony about extrajudicial utterances of a third person made outside the presence of the parties qualifies as hearsay evidence. Whether it is hearsay depends on the purpose for which it is offered. … T.R. 38(B) clearly provides that a demand for trial by jury is permissible “of any issue triable of right by a jury.” (emphasis added). It then follows, is the instant case one where a jury trial can be demanded?

Johnston v. State

702 N.E.2d 1085 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 9, 1998

Nowhere is the distinction between ‘void’ and ‘voidable’ more clearly brought into focus than in the area of jurisdiction. … By its qualifying language, restricting the effect of the judgment to the particular party involved, I can only construe the holding in Stidham to say that such a judgment is voidable rather than void.

American Cyanamid Co. v. Stephen

623 N.E.2d 1065 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 8, 1993

Aware of the carry over problems created by Scepter, American Cyanamid established a settlement program in 1988 to compensate farmers for crop damage due to Seepter use. … Thus, our review is limited to the second inquiry, ie., whether the conclusions of law and judgment are clearly erroneous. The judgment of the trial court will be reversed only if it is clearly erroneous.

Martin v. Noble County Sheriff's Dept

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 4, 2021

Harp, Hutsell and Dunafin argue that they “are entitled to summary judgment due to lack of personal involvement and/or are entitled to qualified immunity.” County Defendants’ Memorandum in Support (ECF No. 139), p. 5. … Dec. 4, 2019) (“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Evan J. Hodge v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2017

We reverse only where the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances. Id. … Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 45A03-1701-CR-111 | November 30, 2017 Page 5 of 12  qualify as dying declarations and constituted hearsay because no evidence was presented that Joshua

Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Inc. v. Sebelius

988 F. Supp. 2d 958 · 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 … coverage for employees (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

McGraw-Edison Co. v. Northeastern Rural Electric Membership Corp.

678 N.E.2d 1120 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1997

It is clearly based on § 402A of the Restatement of Torts Second. Indiana was among the early jurisdictions to adopt § 402A, at least as Indiana law was predicted by its federal bench. … This record does not establish even a conspicuous and explicit provision barring strict liability claims.

Robert Jenkins v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 27, 2017

regarded as precedent or cited before any Court of Appeals and Tax Court court except for the purpose of establishing … Following sentencing, when an incarcerated prisoner believes he has completed a program and qualifies for credit, “application for educational credit time must be made to and the initial ruling thereon