Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1980–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Tolliver v. Stategreen1 sentence2018See id. | 1 | 1 |
Gallagher v. Stategreen2 sentences2015A new trial is appropriate where there is “no usable transcript available for appeal.” Gallagher v. State, 274 Ind. 235 , 410 N.E.2d 1290, 1292 (1980). 2015A new trial is appropriate where there is “no usable transcript available for appeal.” Gallagher v. State, 274 Ind. 235 , 410 N.E.2d 1290, 1292 (1980). | 1 | 1 |
Desmond Turner v. State of Indianagreen1 sentence2015“Generally, errors in the admission of evidence are to be disregarded unless they affect the substantial rights of a party.” Turner v. State, 953 N.E.2d 1039, 1059 (Ind. 2011). | 1 | 1 |
Dill v. Stategreen1 sentence2013See Dill v. State, 741 N.E.2d 1230, 1233 (Ind. 2001) (stating that “[e]rrors in 9 the giving or refusing of instructions are harmless where a conviction is clearly sustained by the evidence and the jury could not properly have found otherwise”). | 1 | 1 |
United Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Cookgreen1 sentence1994Upon closer examination, however, Cook clearly instructs that it is the nature of the relationship, and not merely the number of years associated therewith, that triggers the duty to advise. 2 *570 Cook, supra at 528 (requiring a "long-established relationship of entrustment") (emphasis supplied). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Pentecostal House of Prayer, Inc.
green
1 sentence1980Our Supreme Court set out the proper standard of review in Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Pentecostal House of Prayer (1978), Ind., 380 N.E.2d 1225 , 1228: “It is fundamental that in reviewing actions of a trial court, an appellate court can neither weigh the evidence nor determine the credibility of witnesses. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Schmidt Enterprises, Inc. v. State
green
1 sentence1980Ind. Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 59(G): Schmidt Enterprises, Inc. v. State (1976), Ind.App., 354 N.E.2d 247 ; Haskett v. Haskett (1975), 164 Ind.App. 105 , 327 N.E.2d 612 . | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Haskett v. Haskett
green
2 sentences1980Ind. Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 59(G): Schmidt Enterprises, Inc. v. State (1976), Ind.App., 354 N.E.2d 247 ; Haskett v. Haskett (1975), 164 Ind.App. 105 , 327 N.E.2d 612 . 1980Ind. Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 59(G): Schmidt Enterprises, Inc. v. State (1976), Ind.App., 354 N.E.2d 247 ; Haskett v. Haskett (1975), 164 Ind.App. 105 , 327 N.E.2d 612 . | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.