Case law

FOX v. BROWN

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 8, 2020

I advised him I clearly have not been trying to deny him medications since I have been providing care for him. … Dkt. 64-2 ¶ 22. 20-60 mg would qualify as a low dose of Cymbalta. Id. Typically, a patient reporting neuropathic-type pain is started at the lowest recommended dosage in order to assess the presence of side effects.

BABAYEMI v. NOW COURIER, INC.

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 28, 2023

Oct. 6, 2023) (differences among class members, including which ones qualify as non-exempt, "is an issue that is more appropriate to raise at step two, when the Court reevaluates the collective, not at step one."). … Plaintiffs respond that the Notice clearly states that the case is at an early stage and that there has been no decision by the Court as to whether Plaintiffs' position or NOW's position is the correct one, so "there is

Shah v. Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 18, 2020

As stated in my preliminary approval order, Rule 23(a)’s requirements are clearly satisfied in this case. First, numerosity is practically a foregone conclusion in a large securities class action like this. … I’m hardly qualified to do that. But I can report on and utilize the top-line findings from each study.

Project Design & Piping, Inc. v. Siemens Industry, Inc.

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

Project Design performed on the contract without complaint to the Addendum, and thus, Project Design’s performance from March 2017 to July 2018 qualified as acceptance of the Counter- Offer. … “Once a prima facie case is established on an account, the burden shifts to the account debtor to prove that the claimed amount is incorrect.” Id. at 1091-92. (citation omitted).

Z.H. v. Garcia

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 4, 2024

In addition, the Local Rules clearly state that “[m]otions to publish deposition transcripts are not required.” N.D. Ind. L.R. 26-2(3). … In fact, CCSD is requesting that the court not only compel the identification of all health care providers, but enter a qualified protective order so that CCSD can directly obtain all of Roberts’ medical records from all

Tartareanu v. United States

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 17, 2020

Those require a defendant to establish that: (1) before taking action, (2) he in good faith sought the advice of an attorney whom he considered competent, (3) for the purpose of securing advice … By analyzing each deficiency in isolation, the appellate court clearly misapplied the Strickland prejudice prong.”).