Case law

Williams v. Wellman Thermal Systems Corp.

684 F. Supp. 584 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 14, 1988

The purpose of ERISA is to prescribe minimum vesting and accrual standards for qualifying employee retirement benefit plans; to establish minimum rules for employee participation and plan funding; to delineate fiduciary standards … If the parties clearly express their intent in their documents, no genuine issue of material fact would preclude a grant of summary judgment.

Shawn Spencer v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 3, 2020

Spencer is Not a Sexually Violent Predator per Statute [18] The main issue on appeal is whether Spencer’s two Florida convictions qualify him as an SVP in Indiana.9 The statute defining the term “sexually violent … [23] The plain language of Indiana Code section 35-38-1-7.5(b)(1)(C) clearly provides that a person is an SVP if they commit the offense of child molesting “as a . . .

Stewart v. United States

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 17, 2023

If a defendant cannot establish one of the Strickland prongs, a court need not consider the other. Groves v. United States, 755 F.3d 588, 591 (7th Cir. 2014). … Here too, whichever part of the statute the Defendant was convicted of violating is inconsequential; an offense resulting in a serious bodily injury is clearly a crime of violence, as is an intentional and rude, insolent

SADDI

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 17, 2026

Saddi's claim fails because she has not shown that she is a qualified individual with a disability. … comes upon the scene of an emergency or accident . . . or is summoned to the scene of an emergency or accident and, in good faith, gratuitously renders emergency are at the scene of the emergency or accident is immune

Boxell v. Plan for Group Insurance of Verizon Communications, Inc.

51 F. Supp. 3d 759 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 22, 2014

Boxell qualified as disabled from September 29, 2009, through the date of the decision. (R. 2687, 2693). … First, she spends considerable effort trying to establish that MetLife denied her claim because of its conflict of interest.

Lurz v. United States Parole Commission, Department of Justice

659 F. Supp. 441 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 30, 1987

“The question of abstractness or the concreteness of issues in the ripeness doctrine is clearly akin to the specific personal injury component of the standing doctrine.” Id. … The differences in the doctrines are a matter of degree, with the prudential concerns establishing a higher barrier.

P.T. Barnum's Nightclub v. Duhamell

766 N.E.2d 729 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 23, 2002

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1 The Club is an establishment which provides adult entertainment, more particularly exotic dancing, to its customers. … Former employees such as Lobosco are clearly not "parties" to the litigation. The Comment then clarifies who qualifies as a "party" in the case of a corporate party.

OLSON

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 8, 2026

However, Olson's response brief clearly identifies his disability as Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, and the Court is free to consider materials or elaborations in a response brief "so long as those materials … (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing

MADDOX

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 26, 2026

This section clearly applies to Maddox. … Serious questions of sovereign immunity and separation of powers arise if prisoners may obtain benefits for which Congress has plainly stated they are ineligible. Consider sovereign immunity.

John Reno v. Dennis O. Hamilton, Cathy A. Hamilton, Stephen Wayne Bell II, Stephanie L. Bell, Stacie L. Bell, Sonia K. Bell-Brenizer (mem. dec.)

102 N.E.3d 353 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 24, 2018

A judgment is clearly erroneous when a review of the record leaves us with a firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. at 840. … He argues that “[t]he law in Indiana is that ‘recording does not establish ownership, and whether or not a deed is recorded has no effect on its validity.’”

Gregory D. Swagger v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2013

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. … The statute clearly gives the trial court three options with respect to sanctioning a probationer who has violated his probation terms.

Dodd v. Indiana Department of Corrections

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 9, 2021

To establish liability for claims of inadequate medical care, a prisoner must satisfy both an objective and subjective component by showing: (1) his medical need was objectively serious; and (2) the defendant acted with … Finally, Dodd names the Indiana Department of Correction as a defendant, but this state agency has Eleventh Amendment immunity. de Lima Silva v.

In Re Cg

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.

Steven Hagan v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 15, 2018

Decision shall not be Mar 15 2018, 8:07 am regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK court except for the purpose of establishing … Gellenbeck was clearly charged with far more than mere supervision—it seems that he was charged with nothing less than helping V.S. to turn her academic and personal lives around, a responsibility

Corey L. Spurlock v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 2017

In other words, the offenses of felony-murder and [C]lass A felony conspiracy were each established by the proof of a fact not used to establish the other offense. Id. at 178. … In Spivey, the supreme court determined that the defendant’s “convictions for felony-murder and conspiracy to commit burglary [did] not qualify for relief” under the rules of statutory construction and common law

SPARGER-WITHERS v. TAYLOR

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 7, 2024

There was no absolute immunity for prosecutors. Kalina v. … Clearly the Constitution is roomy enough to allow for policies that do not fit with modern orthodoxy.

JOHNSON v. CLARK COUNTY SHERIFF

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 27, 2022

. § 1915A(b), the Court must dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such … To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, "the plaintiff must prove that he is a qualified individual with a disability, that he was denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity

HOOK v. NORVELL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 26, 2020

In Response, Hook points out that her Complaint clearly articulates as to each individual Defendant their personal actions which resulted in their being named in this action. … In her response, Hook does not directly address the Defendants' immunity argument.

HUNT v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 23, 2022

Hunt responds that DLGF's stated reason is "clearly false," and is a pretext for not selecting him as the Director of Information Systems despite his stronger qualifications (Filing No. 55 at 27). … To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination for an ADEA failure-to-promote claim, a plaintiff "must show: (1) [he] was 40 or older, (2) [he] applied for and was qualified for the position sought, (3) [he] was

Marion County Auditor v. Revival Temple Apostolic Church

898 N.E.2d 437 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 24, 2008

The trial court’s declaration that the tax sale was void ab initio clearly intended to require Marion County to refund the repurchase price of the property. … See Ind.Code § 6-1.1-11-1 ("An exemption is a privilege which may be waived by a person who owns tangible property that would qualify for the exemption.