Case law

Matter of Berryhill

127 B.R. 427 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · May 7, 1991

In the absence of objection, the order of October 25 clearly and unambiguously required the debtors to do one of two things by a date certain. … Nonetheless, “[t]he debt- or has time after time failed to comply with the Court’s Orders, the Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, and it simply no longer qualifies for any additional leniency.”

David L. Searcy v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 30, 2026

A trial court abuses its discretion if its ruling is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it. Id. [36] Here, the challenged evidence was relevant. … The restrictions, however, may apply if Searcy’s offenses qualify as an “episode of criminal conduct” under Indiana Code § 35- 50-1-2(c)-(d) (2020).

Think Tank Software Development Corp. v. Chester, Inc.

30 N.E.3d 738 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2015

Next, we concluded that Think Tank had established a dispute of material fact as to lost profits arising from Chester’s relationship with four specific customers. … To invoke this doctrine, the matters decided in the earlier appeal must clearly appear to be the only possible construction of an opinion. Id. at 1082-83 .

WILLIAM JEFFREY BURNETT V. CONSECO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 26, 2025

Browne's experience as an applied economist does not qualify him. … The CNO Defendants have not clearly defined the "decidedly scurrilous opinions" that they seek to exclude, but they identify only Mr.

State of Indiana v. Shianne Brooks-Brown

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 2024

Thus, in Marley our Supreme Court was obliged to direct the defendant to present her effects-of- battery evidence under the insanity defense in accordance with our legislature’s clearly stated intent … We noted that the out-of-state attorney was not qualified to provide expert testimony on the effects of battery. Id.

McIntosh v. State

829 N.E.2d 531 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 13, 2005

Richard Ofshe, a University of Berkeley psychologist who was qualified as an expert in social psychology and police interrogation techniques, testified at the suppression hearing. … It is our hope that the Columbus Police Department will err on the side of caution in the future and conduct interrogations that clearly follow the law of Miranda. 6 .

Santelli v. RAHMATULLAH

966 N.E.2d 661 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 2012

Clearly, the Act allows for recovery from criminal defendants and our Supreme Court has approved the allocation of fault to criminal defendants. I.C. § 34-51-2-10 (West, Westlaw current through 2011 1st Reg. … Meads, 569 N.E.2d 637 (Ind.1991) (incorporating Restatement (Second) of Torts § 332 in adopting the “invitation test” for use in determining who qualifies as an invitee in premises liability actions); see also Frye v.

Vandalia Railroad v. Stillwell

181 Ind. 267 · Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1914

Dec. 339 , from which case the rule became one of general application, so that the statute under consideration marks a distinct departure from the established rule respecting fellow servants. … There was clearly reasonable foundation for discrimination.” In Soon Hing v. Crowley (1885), 113 U. S. 703 , 5 Sup. Ct. 730, 28 L.

James O. Jones v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 2017

Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Jun 30 2017, 8:56 am court except for the purpose of establishing … A defendant’s statement may also be the product of coercion, and thus inadmissible, if it is obtained through promise of immunity or mitigation of punishment. Massey v.

American Fletcher National Bank & Trust Co. v. American Fletcher National Bank & Trust Co.

161 Ind. App. 166 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 6, 1974

Rosalind established for Barbara a trust with assets of approximately $275,000.00. Velma and Key were married in 1965 and lived as husband and wife until his death in 1971. … The will in the Whitman case contained language that is clearly distinguish *182 able from that involved in this case. 252 Ind. App. 669 , 251 N.E.2d at 672 .

Cheek v. Hamlin

150 Ind. App. 681 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 1972

The parties stipulated the following: the date of the fatal collision was December 16, 1967, with the train striking the Ford Ranchero at Long Avenue at about 12:50 o’clock; Norma Jean Cheek was the duly appointed, qualified … E. 2d 167 , the rule with respect to willful or wanton [misconduct] under the Guest Statute is well established. The difficulty is only in applying the changing factual situation to the established precedents.

Jimmie I. Immel v. Jennifer W. Immel

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2012

Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of FILED Jul 25 2012, 9:27 am establishing … Wife acknowledges that the requirement that Husband continue to carry her on his health insurance qualifies as an award of maintenance.

Entertainment USA, Inc. v. Moorehead Communications, Inc.

93 F. Supp. 3d 915 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 20, 2015

It does not define the term “activation,” or qualify it by any type of service or length of service plan. … If so, extrinsic evidence may help to establish a usage of trade or locality.”) (quotations omitted).

Wilson v. Lear Seating Corp.

258 F. Supp. 3d 916 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 14, 2017

When attempting to establish a retaliation claim, a plaintiff may proceed under the direct or indirect methods of proof. … CCA of Tennessee LLC, 650 F.3d 640, 650 (7th Cir. 2.Ó11) (noting “suspension could qualify as an adverse employment action”); Castro , 786 F.3d at'564 (noting that tennination is an adverse employment action).

Saint Joseph's College v. Morrison, Inc.

158 Ind. App. 272 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 1973

Such statutes must be strictly construed in order to determine whether the mechanic qualified himself under the statute to receive the liberal remedies there available. Puritan Engineering Corp. v. … These cases indicate an established policy of allowing joinder of claims in cases where such joinder will not prejudice the rights of the property owner.

Grossbaum v. Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority

909 F. Supp. 1187 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 15, 1995

Rice, 910 F.2d 1449, 1455-56 (7th Cir.1990) (en banc) (defendant decisionmaker testified as to his motive because defendants’ motive crucial in Equal Protection challenge even in qualified immunity analysis), and retaliation … The record clearly shows that the 1993 Policy on Seasonal Displays was adopted for the purpose of resolving legitimate concerns about the Establish- . ment Clause, not because the board was hostile to religion.

Edward Graveline v. Melina (Graveline) Peyovich

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 2012

An abuse of discretion occurs when the judgment is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and 1 On appeal, Wife briefly argues that Ind. … In that case, following the dissolution of the parties’ marriage in 1996, a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) was entered reflecting the trial court’s distribution of the husband’s vested retirement benefits.

Blasingame v. Galipeau

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 19, 2021

At the same time, a prisoner is not required to show that he was “literally ignored” to establish deliberate indifference. Berry v. Peterman, 604 F.3d 435, 441 (7th Cir. 2010). … He does not clearly define the policy or provide enough detail to plausibly suggest that it was an official policy of Wexford that caused his injury in this case.

James F. Glass v. CPG Partners, LP, JDR Fixtures, Inc., Under Armour Premium Outlet, KP Sullivan Builders, Inc. (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 22, 2019

Worton entered an order appointing Judge Benjamin as special judge upon her qualifying. … the party’s claim or defense clearly became frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless; or litigated the action in bad faith.

Donna J. Hamilton v. Robert D. Hamilton

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 16, 2019

Its decision will not be reversed unless prejudicial error is clearly demonstrated. Devereux v. Love, 30 N.E.3d 754, 766 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), trans. denied. … If necessary, Wife shall be responsible for preparing the Qualified Domestic Relations Order.