Case law

Montoya v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 14, 2019

At the time of the CPD, the claimant had the following medically determinable impairments: cell-mediated immunity defect and mycobacterium tuberculosis. 4. … The determination or decision must contain specific reasons for the weight given to the individual’s symptoms, be consistent with and supported by the evidence, and be clearly articulated so the individual and any subsequent

Ferdinand v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 22, 2022

A five step test has been established to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See Singleton v. Bowen, 841 F.2d 710, 711 (7th Cir. 1988); Bowen v. … The record establishes a diagnosis of hand, wrist, and finger arthralgia as well as stiffness and swelling (Tr. 794, 776, 784, 793, 802, 811, 824).

Cordle

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 29, 2026

To establish liability under the Eighth Amendment, a prisoner must show: (1) his medical need was objectively serious; and (2) the defendant acted with deliberate indifference to that need. Farmer v. … A preliminary injunction is a “very far-reaching power, never to be indulged in except in a case clearly demanding it.” Cassell v. Snyders, 990 F.3d 539, 544 (7th Cir. 2021) (quoting Orr v.

Kerns v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 6, 2021

Clearly, the ALJ’s errors in evaluating Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia resulted in factual and logical gaps related to the symptom evaluation and residual functional capacity assessment. … Powers because she was allegedly “not qualified to opine on the physical functioning of [Plaintiff]” and because Dr.

Greenland Homes, Inc. v. E & S Marketing Resources, Inc. (In re Greenland Homes, Inc.)

227 B.R. 710 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 16, 1998

Here, presumably, the Creditor would argue that it qualifies as a “contractor”, “laborer”, or a person “furnishing materials”, as those terms are used in the Mechanic’s Lien Statute. … At best, their testimony established that a sign was erected in Waterford Crossing on the lot on which a model was to be built.

Brooks v. Avancez

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

Defendant has clearly met its burden of production, and Plaintiff does not argue otherwise. … (ECF No. 65-2 at 11) (noting only that the training sheet “does not explain the evaluation nor establish the method used to reach the evaluation”).

Walker v. Wexford

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 3, 2021

However, Walker clearly alleges that Dr. Merondit performed two surgeries on him, and the court surgeries were “unsterilized,” and he suffered infections after both surgeries. Id. … The allegation that other people were present in the medical unit, and that Walker eventually developed infections, does not establish a plausible allegation that Dr.

Cody E. Reynolds v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 2020

[15] After the interview, the interview team met with Tricia to establish a plan to protect the girls. … [60] To assess whether a sentence is inappropriate, we look first to the statutory range established for the class of the offense.

Polycon Industries Inc v. R & B Plastics Machinery, LLC

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

R&B responds that the four months of repairs prior to May 2017 were done to aid Polycon in producing qualified, saleable bottles to Ecolab. [DE 249 at 7 n.2.] … necessary to establish the warranty period ‘cause we still need a definition of successful operation to determine when the warranty period started.”

In Re Fedex Ground Pckg. Sys., Inc., Emp. Practices Lit.

712 F. Supp. 2d 776 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 21, 2010

B-26. (3) The reengineered CRL-551 (formerly OPR-551) states that qualified drivers must have a minimum of six months driving experience (as opposed to a year) or have completed QPDL training (as instituted in 2003), and … In doing so, FedEx more clearly defined a policy and, as a result, narrowed and reduced its policy statements. D’Alesandro Dep., pp. 108-110.

Wardingley v. PQ Corporation

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

As previously noted, I can set aside the first issue because state common-law actions qualify as “other provision[s] having the force and effect of law” under the FAAAA. … In other words, the injured party is deprived of its property without recourse or compensation, and the tortfeasor is granted “immunity from liability for their tortious conduct.” Id.

United States v. Board of School Commissioners of City of Indianapolis

506 F. Supp. 657 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 9, 1979

In inclement weather, busing clearly confers a benefit to health, comfort, and safety. … Hiring of IPS Teachers by Other Corporations: In acquiring additional teaching personnel for the three school years commencing with the year 1979-80, each transferee school corporation is required to make offers to qualified

CRAIG

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 10, 2026

The Court excludes evidence on a motion in limine only if the evidence clearly is not admissible for any purpose. See Hawthorne Partners v. AT&T Techs., Inc., 831 F. Supp. 1398, 1400 (N.D. Ill. 1993). … The Court will not allow the Plaintiffs to introduce evidence for the purpose of establishing that any code violation establishes negligence.

Paschal v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 23, 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.

Gumwood HP Shopping Partners, L.P. v. Simon Property Group, Inc.

221 F. Supp. 3d 1033 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 22, 2016

Under that rule, a witness “who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education” may offer an opinion if the following criteria are met: (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized … Plaintiffs must first establish, however, that they were injured by the defendant’s unlawful conduct, and their damages model must then measure the effect of that injury: “Once causation of damages has been established, the

Fry v. Ancestry.com Operations Inc.

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

Fry does not qualify for the protection of the statute because he is not a qualifying personality, as his name and likeness have no commercial value. … In Toney, the Seventh Circuit clearly stated, “Copyright laws do not reach identity claims such as [plaintiff’s].

Busz v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 7, 2022

Thus, as to DIB, he must establish that he was disabled as of that date. See Stevenson v. … Aug. 24, 2020). 14 While Busz does not specifically challenge the fingering or handling limitations assigned in the RFC, the ALJ is nonetheless encouraged upon remand to more clearly articulate

DAZA v. STATE OF INDIANA

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 10, 2020

Daza’s only response to this is that the older individual was not qualified to do the job, but his opinion that the older individual was not qualified is not evidence of discrimination…. … Rule 11 sanctions may be appropriate where a party asserts claims that are clearly barred. Fed. R. Civ.

Nihiser v. Sendak

405 F. Supp. 482 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 4, 1974

It is a clearly established principle that the federal courts are charged with the primary duty of vindicating federal rights. Escalera v. … However, the court pointed out that the holding in the case did “not question or qualify in any way the principles of equity, comity, and federalism that must restrain a federal court when asked to enjoin a state court proceeding

Smith v. State

465 N.E.2d 1105 · Indiana Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1984

Defendant claims there was error in the voir dire of the jury because death qualifying questions were asked by the State for the purpose of rejecting prospective jurors who are not in favor of capital punishment. … In order to establish a conflict of interest such that ineffective representation of counsel resulted, a defendant must show that his counsel “actively represented conflicting interests” and establish that this adversely