Case law

BEAVER, JR. v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 10, 2022

Beaver has not established that his failure to obtain an affidavit or testimony from Mr. … Beaver after he returned from FMLA leave arose out of retaliatory motives, he has failed to establish that he was subjected to the type of intolerable working conditions the Seventh Circuit law has required to establish

Sanders v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2025

A claimant qualifies as disabled if he or she cannot perform such work. … Nor does the record suggest that the VE independently reviewed the medical record so as to be clearly aware of Ms. Sanders’s limitations. To the extent that Ms.

Lakhvir Singh v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 13, 2014

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose Jun 13 2014, 6:31 am of establishing the defense of res … address this argument because, even if Singh was entitled to an interpreter, he has failed to demonstrate that fundamental error 2 The rule was amended effective January 1, 2014, and now provides: “An interpreter must be qualified

HOTT

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 30, 2025

Respondents argue that § 1225(b)(2) pertains to Petitioner because he is an "applicant for admission" and "not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted." Dkt. 11 at 8–9. … Instead, they claim that his pending asylum application qualifies him as an "applicant for admission." Dkt. 11 at 11.

Dawkins v. Boston University Trustees of

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 15, 2019

In order to establish a claim for failure to accommodate, Plaintiff must show that: (1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) Defendant was aware of his disability; and (3) Defendant failed to reasonably accommodate … In summary, Plaintiff did everything he could to portray to the Defendant that he did not suffer from a qualifying disability.

James R. Belcher, Sr. v. Sandra G. Belcher

Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 31, 2013

Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of Dec 31 2013, 8:48 am establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral … Thus, it was clearly the trial court’s intent to effect a fifty-fifty distribution.

Vandergraff v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 7, 2025

Standard for Disability Disability benefits are available only to those individuals who can establish disability under the Social Security Act. Estok v. … A claimant qualifies as disabled if he or she cannot perform such work.

Sturgis v. Warden

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

As a general rule, “[n]egligence on the part of a prisoner’s postconviction attorney does not qualify as cause.” Maples v. Thomas, 565 U.S. 266, 280 (2012). … We have explained that clearly established Federal law for purposes of §2254(d)(1) includes only the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of this Court’s decisions.

Dana Corp. v. American Standard, Inc.

866 F. Supp. 1481 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 24, 1994

Part II-B addresses an issue not clearly answered by other courts: what sort of showing, short of direct evidence that a defendant’s hazardous waste was disposed of at the site in question, will suffice to allow a CERCLA … To be admissible, expert testimony must satisfy Fed.R.Evid. 401; additionally, the expert must be qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, Fed.R.Evid. 702; the court must find that scientific

Rogers v. Neil

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 24, 2023

To establish such a claim, the prisoner must demonstrate that the defendant “acted with deliberate indifference to his right to refuse medical treatment.” Id. … Rogers’ statement that he wasn’t under the influence of opioids and clearly communicated his desire to refuse Narcan to Nurse Tiffany.

Norwest Bank, N.A. v. Federal Kemper Life Insurance

110 F. Supp. 2d 774 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 26, 2000

To establish a genuine issue of fact, the non-moving party “must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts.” … This derives from the court’s “[c]ase-management authority ... to shepherd cases towards fair, yet efficient, resolution ...” and hence “litigants have an unflagging duty to comply with clearly communicated case-management

Bruce A. Craig v. Cynthia E. Craig

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 30, 2012

The trial court‟s findings and conclusions will be set aside only if they are clearly erroneous. Id. … The trial court abuses its discretion if its decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150, AFL-CIO v. Republic Services

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 22, 2026

During the arbitration hearing, Local 150 witnesses testified that the LCLF employees were engaged in duties consistent with long-established work routines, including phone call took place between Mr. … Finally, Arbitrator Capone’s award is clearly outside the arbitration record and irrelevant to the issue before the Court.

Hendrickson v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 25, 2025

Standard for Disability Disability benefits are available only to those individuals who can establish disability under the Social Security Act. Estok v. … A claimant qualifies as disabled if he or she cannot perform such work.

Lawrence Ray Holley, II v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 30, 2012

Webber recalled being granted use immunity for some or all of his testimony at Holley’s trial but could not recall the prosecutor in that case making any remarks about Webber’s pending charges. … Standard of Review In post-conviction proceedings, the petitioner bears the burden of establishing grounds for relief by a preponderance of the evidence. Helton v.

HUBBERT

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 23, 2025

Hubbert is a qualified person due to his blindness as a disability for purposes of his ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims. Mr. … Hubbert given that he was clearly blind and could not see the screens of these devices to do anything— including access commissary and reading materials—by himself.

INDIANA PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SERVICES COMMISSION v. INDIANA FAMILY AND SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 3, 2024

Granting a preliminary injunction is "an exercise of a very far-reaching power, never to be indulged in except in a case clearly demanding it." Roland Mach. Co. v. … Myers, 677 F.2d 1317, 1322 (9th Cir. 1982) (holding that the possibility of plaintiffs being denied Medicaid benefits sufficient to establish irreparable harm); Fishman v. Paolucci, 628 F.

INDIANA PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SERVICES COMMISSION v. INDIANA FAMILY AND SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 30, 2024

Granting a preliminary injunction is "an exercise of a very far-reaching power, never to be indulged in except in a case clearly demanding it." Roland Mach. Co. v. … Myers, 677 F.2d 1317, 1322 (9th Cir. 1982) (holding that the possibility of plaintiffs being denied Medicaid benefits sufficient to establish irreparable harm); Fishman v. Paolucci, 628 F.

VON DUPRIN LLC v. MORAN ELECTRIC SERVICE, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 30, 2020

As the Supreme Court of the United States has explained, § 9607 and § 9613 provide two clearly distinct remedies. U.S. v. Atlantic Research Corp., 551 U.S. 128, 138 (2007). … In CERCLA, “[w]hen a court cannot assign an ideal measure of monetary responsibility to an otherwise responsible party—because, for example, that party is immune from suit, bankrupt, or defunct—this gives rise to an orphan

McFadden v. Blocker

58 L.R.A. 878 · Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · Jan 13, 1899

As a remedy in the particular case, it has fully performed its offices and established the rights for which it was called into requisition. … This was based very much on the word ‘subsequent, ’ which is used to qualify the term ‘purchasers and mortgagees,’ and means, as we thought, ‘subsequent to the omission to refile. ’ But this expression is not employed as