Case law

Indiana Civil Rights Commission v. Wellington Village Apartments

594 N.E.2d 518 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 2, 1992

Clearly, this provided Jaenicke, a white, a better opportunity to rent an apartment at Wellington than Johnson, a black, particularly considering the first come, first served practice. 29. … They are, therefore, conclusively established. TR. 36(B). 3 Jaenicke thought she'd said H-17.

Christopher Wertz v. State of Indiana

41 N.E.3d 276 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 7, 2015

Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 587 (1948) (holding that a person, by mere presence in a suspected vehicle, does not lose immunities from search of his person to which he would otherwise be entitled). … [40] Further, although Knotts may be relevant to the extent its legal reasoning could be transferred to this case, the type of search conducted in that case is clearly 9 At oral argument, the

In Re Anderson

88 B.R. 877 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 15, 1988

The Debtor next called and qualified as an expert witness in farm land appraisals one Charles Dillon, who stated he had physically inspected the land, checked the Debt- *880 or’s title, reviewed local ASCS records relating … It has not yet been established as to what extent they are secured. However, to justify adequate protection payments under Section 1205, the creditor must show that the value of the property is suffering.

SWEAT v. NORTON

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 18, 2023

As a practical matter, there are not enough lawyers willing and qualified to accept a pro bono assignment in every pro se case. See Olson v. … Sweat also alleges that Investigator Benefield "repeat[ed] what [the warden] stated, 'video [unavailable] for your viewing after describing what he could clearly see on each of the 3 videos."

Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad v. Burtch

192 Ind. 199 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1922

in tariffs, all rules and regulations to govern the relation between the patron and carrier;” but so far, they had been unable to state, in rules, everything so clearly as to avoid interpretation. … The witness in this case was shown to be qualified to answer the question. The question, under the circumstances of this case, was a proper one and a responsive answer was properly allowed to go to the jury. ■ 9.

Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, Inc., Save the Valley, Inc., Sierra Club, and Valley Watch, Inc. v. Duke Energy Indiana, Inc., Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 2014

As applicable, the Commission shall allow an eligible business to recover: (1) the costs associated with qualified utility system property; and (2) qualified utility system expenses. I.C. § 8-1-8.8-12(d). … As to the financial impact, Intervenors cite to Douglas’s testimony establishing the financing costs during the IGCC-9 period.

Bernard v. Sweetwater Sound, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 29, 2023

Sweetwater contends that Heintz’s response to Bernard’s question is clearly “a description of temporary leave,” not termination. … And before Bernard was pregnant, Sweetwater informally 11 The record does not clearly reflect whether Hostetler injured her back on or off the job.

Henry McMullen v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 14, 2013

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), Aug 14 2013, 5:42 am this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of … “To qualify as fundamental error, an error must be so prejudicial to the rights of the defendant as to make a fair trial impossible.” Rowe v. State, 867 N.E.2d 262, 266 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).

William L. Koss v. Karen J. Koss (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2017

[40] Wife’s expert admitted that he did not appraise the company’s inventory because he is not a qualified appraiser. … Conclusion [55] The record clearly establishes that Husband was a consistently recalcitrant, untruthful and devious litigant throughout two years of the dissolution proceedings.

Heller v. Dailey

28 Ind. App. 555 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 2, 1902

proprietorship thereof the absolute owner of the oil and gas in and under it, in its free and natural state, not yet reduced to actual control of any person, but he together with the other owners of land in the gas field has a qualified … It is not shown clearly and unquestionably in any of these paragraphs that the assignee was expressly or impliedly anything more than an assignee of the lessees, recognized and treated as such by the appellant, or that there

Bobby Wine v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 20, 2014

I have ruled that the jury will not, under any circumstances, hear anything about what you believe to be a deal offered by the State to either be immune from prosecution or to have … His actions were clearly motivated to undermine these proceedings and to attempt to cause a mistrial. App. pp. 4-5 (footnote omitted).

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

113 Ind. 544 · Indiana Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1887

The carrier clearly violated a legal duty in not stopping the train a sufficient length of time to permit the appellee to alight in safety. Terre Haute, etc. R. R. Co. v. Buck, 96 Ind. 346 (49 Am. … Rep. 401 ), bears upon the question here under discussion, inasmuch as it decides that, (1) where the trial court adjudges that a witness is qualified to give an opinion, the appellate court can not review the decision; (

Arnold

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 15, 2025

The express purpose of SORNA is “to protect the public from sex offenders and offenders against children” by “establish[ing] a comprehensive national system for [their] registration.” Id. at 133 (quoting § 20901). … “Absent clearly expressed Congressional intent to the contrary, the plain language should be conclusive.” United States v. Berkos, 543 F.3d 392, 396 (7th Cir. 2008).

Adams v. State

762 N.E.2d 737 · Indiana Supreme Court · Feb 8, 2002

Yet § 6331 clearly gives the Secretary or his delegate discretion as to what property to seize. … This lack of evidence as to the exigency of the circumstances is due at least in part to the fact that the Department was not required to establish exigency under the CSET collection procedures.

Edgeworth v. First National Bank of Chicago

677 F. Supp. 982 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 20, 1988

Edgeworth seeks to step into the position of the Trust and rely on the Trust’s shareholder status to establish the requisite standing to sue derivatively. … The provision of the contract upon which the defendants rely does not create a remedy; it only establishes a right.

Cummings v. Hoosier Marine Properties, Inc.

173 Ind. App. 372 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 1977

Where all or some of the issues in a case tried before a jury or an advisory jury are not supported by sufficient evidence or a verdict thereon is clearly erroneous as contrary to the evidence because the evidence is insufficient … In this context appellants argue that Hoosier Marine is directly liable for the deaths of the victims of the trench cave-in and that it cannot avail itself of an owner immunity based on the purported independent contractor

ATWOOD v. THOMPSON

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 29, 2023

The opening of an unlocked door is sufficient to establish that a breaking has occurred. Higgins v. State, 783 N.E.2d 1180, 1184 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). … immunity.

Noblesville Casting Division of TRW, Inc. v. Prince

438 N.E.2d 722 · Indiana Supreme Court · Aug 11, 1982

First, it is well settled that an expert witness is not permitted to give an opinion where the jurors are as well qualified to form an opinion based on the facts presented. Green v. … Clearly the results of the test increased the likelihood that the bullets found in the defendant’s pocket were from the same box as the bullet removed from the victim.

Hinds v. McNair

413 N.E.2d 586 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 1, 1980

Norma McNair, Xen McNair, Sr.’s wife at the time of his death, who qualified as executrix of his estate in Florida and Indiana, and who was substituted for Xen McNair, Sr., as a party defendant in the present litigation after … The terms of the trust as originally recited by McNair, Sr. clearly do not include a power of revocation.

Liter's of Indiana, Inc. v. Earl E. Bennett and Daniel L. Bodine

51 N.E.3d 285 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 2016

Liter’s defense was that it put up the fence to establish the property line between the two properties. … The proponent of the expert testimony has the burden of establishing the foundation and reliability of the scientific principles on which the testimony is based. Hannan v.