Case law

Gates v. Wellpath

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 4, 2022

. § 1915A, 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 an immune … Gates must name the physician and file an amended complaint clearly explaining what the physician did or did not do which was outside the range of accepted professional standards when treating his knee.

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.

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.

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).

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).

4447 CORP. v. Goldsmith

479 N.E.2d 578 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 12, 1985

It recites he visited one of the appellants' establishments, the Adult Toy and Gift Shop in Indianapolis. … Such evidence clearly demonstrates two or more incidents of racketeering activity, and the obscene nature of the materials at issue in each case.

Malone v. State

441 N.E.2d 1339 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1982

The mere repitition of similar crimes is not enough to qualify for an exception to the general rule. Williams v. State, 417 N.E.2d at 332 ; Willis v. State, 268 Ind. at 272 , 374 N.E.2d at 522 . … This is especially probable when the circumstantial evidence can clearly support either party’s account.

Mar'Quita D. Thomas v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2017

[18] Captain Rotering, who was qualified as an expert in the field of fire investigation, testified as to his opinion: [T]he gasoline was taken out of the can that I found that was … [25] When a defendant alleges that the trial court failed to identify a mitigating circumstance, she is required to establish that the mitigator is both significant and clearly supported by the record

Mark A. Salisbury v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2013

We accept findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, but we accord no deference to conclusions of law. Id. … However, Indiana Code section 35-38-1-7.5(e) allows the prosecuting attorney to request a hearing to determine if a defendant is an SVP if he does not qualify as an SVP by operation of law - in this case, if he commits

Deandre Moore v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 29, 2016

Decision shall not be Jul 29 2016, 8:16 am regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK court except for the purpose of establishing … An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it.

Jeremiah Walls v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 2013

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be Jul 18 2013, 6:27 am regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense … In the instant matter, defense counsel would qualify as a “crucial player” at trial. The record indicates that two members of the jury venire knew defense counsel. Both were ultimately struck from the jury venire.

Maurice Amos, Jr. v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 2014

The error claimed must either “make a fair trial impossible” or constitute “clearly blatant violations of basic and elementary principles of due process.” … To establish that Amos was an habitual offender, the State was required to show that he had “accumulated two (2) prior unrelated felony convictions.” Ind.

Brandon Mockbee v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 2018

Specifically, he argues that his prior Ohio convictions are not “serious enough to qualify as prior convictions for purposes of Indiana’s habitual offender statute[s].” Appellant’s Br. at 22. … An abuse of discretion occurs “where the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances.” Smith v.

NA MAIN STREET LLC v. COOK

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 22, 2020

The statute imposes no such food sales quotas on local establishments. … Thus, NA Main Street LLC clearly faces a concrete risk that its alcoholic beverage retailer's permit will be revoked. See Indiana Fine Wine & Spirits, 459 F.

Henson v. Neal

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 14, 2022

Henson has not plausibly alleged the transfer was retaliatory in light of the Warden’s stated reason for the transfer or that the transfer qualifies as a deprivation. … This speculation is not enough to establish an adverse action. See Swanson v.

Sims v. City of Elkhart

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 11, 2022

Wicks’s sovereign immunity argument unavailing. 2. … Sims asserted requires as one of its elements that the state-law malicious prosecution tort be established. See Welton, 770 F.3d at 674.

Nein v. Greater Clark County School Corp.

95 F. Supp. 2d 961 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 17, 2000

The uncontroverted testimony of the experts on dyslexia clearly establishes that to benefit educationally Student requires an intensive program of individualized, integrated, multi-sensory sequential training. … Testimony of the experts on dyslexia clearly establishes that to benefit educationally Student requires an intensive program of individualized, integrated, multi-sensory sequential training.]

Young v. Fortis Plastics, LLC

294 F.R.D. 128 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 24, 2013

Therefore, typicality is established with respect to the Proposed Class. 4. … Also, counsel for the named plaintiffs must be experienced and qualified and generally be able to conduct the litigation. See Eggleston v. Chi.

Forrest Perkins v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend

Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 31, 2020

“First, if an employee establishes that ‘adequate independent consideration’ supports the employment contract, the Court generally will conclude that the parties intended to establish a relationship in which the employer … Yet the Court excuses the lack of a subpoena by observing that Perkins believed he had to appear and testify—an error the Court describes as one of fact, in contrast to an error of law, which we have held does not qualify

Forrest Perkins v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend

Indiana Supreme Court · Mar 31, 2020

“First, if an employee establishes that ‘adequate independent consideration’ supports the employment contract, the Court generally will conclude that the parties intended to establish a relationship in which the employer … Yet the Court excuses the lack of a subpoena by observing that Perkins believed he had to appear and testify—an error the Court describes as one of fact, in contrast to an error of law, which we have held does not qualify