Case law

Welborn v. Ethicon Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 12, 2022

Supp. 2d at 728 (“what the ‘something more’ is was not clearly established in Tapscott and has not been established since”)); see also Higginbotham, Dkt. #12, slip op. at 5-6. … are not qualified health care providers.”

Holmes v. State

671 N.E.2d 841 · Indiana Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1996

Furthermore, the trial court might well have added support for the finding by noting appellant's incriminating admissions made after the crimes, as well as the wounds he suffered to his hand in the attack, which showed clearly … Furthermore, we conclude the evidence was sufficient to establish that appellant was the more culpable of the two. The sentences were thus not disproportionate. Roche v. State, 596 N.E.2d 896 (Ind.1992). 12.

DirectBuy, Inc. v. Buy Direct, LLC

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 10, 2023

Here, a scheduling order was entered on December 1, 2015 establishing a deadline of February 15, 2016 for amendments to the pleadings. [DE 23]. … Guzorek, 862 N.E.2d 254, at 255 (Ind. 2007) (discussing and applying federal cases in holding that suing a defendant accorded immunity under the law, rather than the non-immune entity or official, constitutes a mistake

Louis Shepherd, Jr. v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 2013

“Determining whether a statement constitutes an excited utterance is essentially a factual determination subject to a clearly erroneous standard of review, sometimes described as the functionally equivalent standard of … It is clear that she called Emily beyond the “one half-hour after the ‘startling event’” that the Court identified in Davenport as qualifying under the excited utterance exception “only under extreme and continuing stress

Jordin C. Shoda v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Sep 9, 2019

A trial court abuses its discretion if its decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court, or if the court has misinterpreted the law. … [47] The McClain court noted that, in order to qualify as a statement made to promote diagnosis or treatment, “there must be evidence that the declarant understood the professional’s role in order to trigger

Dixon

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 14, 2026

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 a defendant who is immune … Dixon qualified for the pre-renal diet. Mr. Dixon believes the damage to his kidneys has progressed from borderline kidney disease to stage 1 kidney disease.

ALI v. IDOC EMPLOYEES

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 22, 2022

Ali has not established, as a matter of law, that he suffered from an objectively serious medical condition, his motion for summary judgment must be denied as to Officer Richey. … App'x 8 The Court notes that Officer Richey does not argue that he is entitled to qualified immunity, thereby waiving the argument for purposes of summary judgment.

AL-AWADI v. United States

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 23, 2020

He explained that not every image of a nude minor qualifies as lascivious and that images with “some type of artistic, scientific, or documentative value” do not qualify. Id. at 201:23–202:11. … Al-Awadi’s claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel fails because he has failed to establish that his argument about the Court’s decision to admit the title of the Reddit page is “clearly stronger” than the

JOSE ALEJANDRO v. FORESTAL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 11, 2025

The removable status of an alien, standing alone, does not qualify. Id. at 691–92. Respondents, nevertheless, contend that "detention alone is not an irreparable injury." Dkt. 15 at 2. … So, based on the facts and circumstances presented in this case, protracted civil detention clearly threatens irreparable harm to Mr. Alejandro.

Dodd v. Indiana Department of Correction

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 3, 2023

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 a defendant who is immune … Dodd is clearly suing the officers for actions taken in the course of their official duties, which the Act does not permit.6 Therefore, these claims will be dismissed.

Zimmer Technology, Inc. v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp.

453 F. Supp. 2d 1030 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 28, 2006

Howmediea argues that this “missing element is clearly taught in Greenwald.” Docket No. 278-1 at 4. … [Precedent clearly establishes that the district court must “make Graham findings before invalidating a patent for obviousness.” Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 234 F.3d 654, 663 (Fed.Cir.2000); see Jones v.

DECKER v. LAMMER

District Court, S.D. Indiana · May 19, 2023

To receive relief under Rule 59(e), the moving party "must clearly establish (1) that the court committed manifest error of law or fact, or (2) that newly discovered evidence precluded entry of judgment." … Edgewood, 733 F.3d at 770; see Glaus, 408 F.3d at 387 (noting that while the Supreme Court "has left the door open for habeas corpus claims challenging prison conditions, it has never found anything that qualified.").

Robert D. Bowen v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 18, 2013

Bowen claims that he qualified for appointed counsel because he was indigent, and the assets he had were not liquid and using them to obtain counsel could impose substantial hardship on himself and his family. … An abuse of discretion occurs if the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court. Id.

Kathryn Davidson v. State of Indiana

Indiana Supreme Court · Jun 21, 2023

By establishing a system that apportions all liability and damages in the same lawsuit, the Act functionally requires plaintiffs to name all defendants in a single suit. … Davidson’s Monroe County action is clearly subject to the Act under this definition. And nothing in subsection 1(b) exempts the Monroe County action from its coverage.

Martin Cenfetelli v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 2013

If the Defendant fails to qualify for, or is rejected from Community Corrections for any reason or at any time, the Defendant shall serve the remaining balance on Community Corrections at the Department of … court may impose whatever sentences it deems appropriate except said sentences shall be served concurrently with 1 The State argues that Paragraph 6 does not directly address the available terms of probation, but it clearly

STRINGHAM v. CARMEL CLAY SCHOOLS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 4, 2024

This Court cannot say that the evidence, when viewed as a whole, demonstrates that the conclusions reached by the Board are clearly erroneous. See id. at *6. … Section 23, the privileges and immunities provision, states: "The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to

United States v. Board of School Commissioners of Indianapolis

368 F. Supp. 1191 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 20, 1973

Those who testified to the contrary tended to qualify their opinions, and in some instances the facts presented by such witnesses simply did not support their conclusions. For example, Dr. … the General Assembly’s seeming lack of attention to the problem to date, as the Court has no reason to doubt that the able members of that body will do their sworn duty to support the Constitution, once that duty is more clearly

Macchia v. Landline Trans, LLC

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 12, 2024

Finally, the fact that the doctors presented their causation opinions most clearly in response to Plaintiff’s counsels’ questions is not dispositive for Defendants. In Valentine v. CSX Transp. … The Seventh Circuit has established a three-step test that applies Daubert and Rule 702 to determine whether expert testimony is relevant and reliable: “(1) whether the witness is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill

CROSBY v. KALLIS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 12, 2024

Crosby's complaint does not clearly indicate which named defendant(s) he wants to sue for these claims. Liberally construed, however, Mr. Crosby may be alleging that P.A. … In other words, consistent with Ziglar and Egbert, the Court concludes that Congress has established alternative remedial structures for claims such as Mr.

Agustin Martinez v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 2012

FILED Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any Dec 05 2012, 9:03 am court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of … R. 702(a), “[i]f scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill,