Case law

Pearson v. Hahn

170 Ind. App. 361 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 24, 1976

On July 30,1971, Barton (one of Fred’s ex-partners) qualified as executor of Fred’s estate. On January 29, 1973, Bank was appointed administrator d/b/n following Barton’s resignation. … of the deceased partner. *372 *371 Before we state our precise holding in this case, we think it important to state clearly when we do not hold.

Most Reverend Noll v. Lincoln National Bank & Trust Co.

117 Ind. App. 554 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 1946

directions for the benefit of all of the orphans of said county; that the Board of Commissioners of Allen County took over the institution known *560 as the Allen County Orphans’ Home; and that appellee is the only one qualified … Such postponement can only arise from language used which clearly and definitely destroys the vested estate — language which will force the mind to such conclusion.”

Griffin v. State

735 N.E.2d 258 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 7, 2000

The Record reflects that Griffin called Dulin as a witness, that the State granted Dulin immunity, and that the Griffin had an opportunity to question Dulin. … If such improper participation constitutes ex parte communication, then it falls clearly within the exception of Ind.

West Clark Community Schools v. H.L.K.

Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1998

This conclusion is also consistent with the firmly established administrative law of this state concerning exhaustion of administrative remedies. See , e.g. , Avon Lakes Joint Venture v. … "Do you mean a judge could order a school to admit a student to a limited-enrollment class because the judge thought the student would benefit even if the student did not qualify for the class?" we asked.

Quinn v. Threlkel

858 N.E.2d 665 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 20, 2006

Elaine evidently qualified for and accepted financial aid for the 2005-06 school year in the form of scholarships, grants, student loans, and work-study. … It clearly wanted "to avoid weekly variations in the order," which is precisely what the trial court's current order does not avoid.

Beachy v. Board of Aviation Commissioners of Kokomo

699 F. Supp. 742 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 21, 1988

But, section 4602 reads: “section 4651 of this title creates no rights or liabilities and shall not affect the validity of any property acquisitions by purchase or condemnation”. 42 U.S.C. § 4602 . 1 Clearly, Congress did … The court found that the provision of the Housing Act at issue did not establish an independent duty on the part of the defendant District of Columbia under section 1983.

Reed v. State

491 N.E.2d 182 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1986

Appellant's Affidavit of Emergency on August 29, 1983, alleging the expiration of the 120 day period did not qualify as a timely objection to preserve his rights under the IAD. … The trial court clearly instructed the jury as to the proper standard of proof to be applied in a criminal case.

In the Matter of: M.M. (Minor Child), Child in Need of Services, M.M. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 2019

We will reverse a CHINS determination only of it was clearly erroneous. Id. … A decision is clearly erroneous if the facts do not support the findings or if it applies the wrong legal standard to properly found facts. Id.

Grove v. State

449 N.E.2d 1122 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 9, 1983

Grove had testified in his own behalf, and these witnesses were called to establish his bad reputation. … The trier of fact may draw reasonable inferences from facts established either by direct or circumstantial evidence. Turpin v.

Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Berkey

136 Ind. 181 · Indiana Supreme Court · Oct 31, 1893

Counsel, in their argument, have discussed the first, second, and fifth assignments, and under the well established rule of this court, the assignments of error as to the third and fourth will be considered as waived. … of the law, is a stipulation in every contract for service; and if the servant is injured by reason of defective appliances placed in his hands by the master or his agent, the master is liable for damages, unless he can clearly

Sherman v. Hougland

1 Ind. L. Rep. 91 · Indiana Supreme Court · Apr 5, 1881

The third instruction given by the court is as follows r “ Fraud is never presumed, but must be clearly proven. … The court does not tell the jury that the relationship affords a presumption of fraud, but simply that it is one link in the chain of circumstances tending to establish fraud.

State v. Springfield Township

6 Ind. 83 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 28, 1854

We are clearly of opinion that it does not. … The several counties of this state shall be held liable for the preservation of said fund, and the payment of the annual interest thereon, at the rate established by law. “ Sec. 4.

Bayless v. City of Frankfort

981 F. Supp. 1161 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 14, 1997

The motion is GRANTED because Plaintiffs have failed to establish that Defendants violated their federal constitutional rights. … Clearly, Plaintiffs satisfy the first step because they were deprived of their vehicle. See United States v.

Menard, Inc. v. Marilyn K. Terew

Indiana Court of Appeals · May 15, 2023

Evidence Rule 702(a) provides that a witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if the expert’s scientific … We will vacate an award of damages when it is not rationally related and so great as to clearly indicate that the jury was motivated by prejudice, passion, or partiality or considered an improper element.

Roper v. Warden

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 5, 2021

establishes a manifest error of law or fact.” … As a general rule, “[n]egligence on the part of a prisoner’s postconviction attorney does not qualify as cause.” Maples v. Thomas, 565 U.S. 266, 280 (2012).

Planned Parenthood of Indiana v. Carter

854 N.E.2d 853 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 22, 2006

The trial court's judgment will be reversed only when clearly erroneous. Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when the record lacks evidence or reasonable inferences from the evidence to support them. … In this Circuit, the right clearly covers medical records and communications.

Miller v. Vanderburgh County

610 N.E.2d 858 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 1993

Neither is Indiana immune from this senseless violence. … Clearly, courthouse security deputies must be on their toes and stay there. 4 .

The Estate of Gary Pfafman v. Lori Lancaster, Individually, and as Guardian of the Estate of Kole Craig

67 N.E.3d 1150 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 18, 2017

The instruction booklets for the de-icers stated in relevant part that, when installing the de-icers, “a qualified electrician [shall] install a properly grounded receptacle outlet” to the heater. Id. at 249. … The crux of the issue on appeal is whether the jury’s verdict is clearly erroneous as contrary to or not supported by the evidence.

Mallory Stout v. Tanner Knotts

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 2023

Bridges (“Judge Bridges”) was selected and qualified to sit as special judge in this case. … Judge Bridges clearly expressed disdain, not only for the type of relief Stout was seeking, but for the gender he believed most often sought this type of relief.

Hasty v. CENT. STATES SE & SW AREAS

851 F. Supp. 1250 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 16, 1994

At Chapter 10, entitled, "Plan Administration," the SPD clearly states that the Board of Trustees has such discretionary power. … Clearly, Central States is not limited to the terms of the SPD to assert that the Board of Trustees has such discretionary authority.