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 2 courts 1973–1999 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Weinstockgreen2 sentences1998Weinstock , 863 F. Supp at 1535 (the circumstances of an affidavit’s execution supported the conclusion that the declarations therein were trustworthy); Botsford General Hosp. v. Citizens Ins. 1997Weinstock, 863 F.Supp. at 1535 (the circumstances of an affidavit’s execution supported the conclusion that the declarations therein were trustworthy); Botsford General Hosp. v. Citizens Ins. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Catterlin v. City of Frankfort
green
1 sentence1999For instance, in Catterlin et al. v. The City of Frankfort, the plaintiffs objected to an annexation petition, arguing that the reasons stated for annexation were insufficient. 87 Ind. 45 (1882). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Hatfield v. La Charmant Home Owners Ass'n
green
1 sentence1994On first blush, Hatfield v. LaCharmant Home Owners Association (1984), Ind.App., 469 N.E.2d 1218 , trans. denied, appears to be the exception to this implicit rule but a close reading of the case reveals that the "agreement'" between the developers and homeowners' association, ie. the declarations and bylaws, did not provide the developers with an exemption from common expense assessments on their uncompleted units. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1973Mims v. State (1970), 255 Ind. 37 , 262 N.E.2d 638 ; Miranda, supra. . . .” In Brown, the State argued that although appellant first refused to waive his rights, the fact that he later confessed constituted an implicit waiver of those rights. 1973Justice De-Bruler countered this contention, quoting the following from Miranda, supra: “An express statement that the individual is willing to make a statement and does not want an attorney followed closely by a statement could constitute a waiver. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Mims v. State
green
2 sentences1973Mims v. State (1970), 255 Ind. 37 , 262 N.E.2d 638 ; Miranda, supra. . . .” In Brown, the State argued that although appellant first refused to waive his rights, the fact that he later confessed constituted an implicit waiver of those rights. 1973Mims v. State (1970), 255 Ind. 37 , 262 N.E.2d 638 ; Miranda, supra. . . .” In Brown, the State argued that although appellant first refused to waive his rights, the fact that he later confessed constituted an implicit waiver of those rights. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
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.