22 Indiana opinions name it 3 courts 1980–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Richardson v. Stategreen2 sentences2020See Richardson, 717 N.E.2d at 49 (drawing upon several early Indiana cases, none of which “presented a comprehensive analysis, a generally articulated test, or a standard of review for double jeopardy claims”). 2015Discussion Article 1, Section 14 of the Indiana Constitution provides: “No person shall be put in jeopardy twice for the same offense.” In Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (Ind.1999), this Court reviewed the history of the Indiana Constitution’s Double Jeopardy Clause to determine and articulate a single comprehensive rule synthesizing and superseding previous formulations and exceptions. | 2 | 6 |
Spivey v. Stategreen2 sentences2013In that case, the court analyzed “the history of the Indiana Constitution’s Double Jeopardy Clause to ascertain and articulate a single comprehensive rule synthesizing and superseding previous formulations and exceptions.” Spivey v. State, 761 N.E.2d 831, 832 (Ind.2002) (citing and clarifying Richardson). 2002Richardson sought to establish "a single comprehensive rule [of double jeopardy] synthesizing and superseding previous formulations and exceptions." Spivey v. State, 761 N.E.2d 831, 832 (Ind.2002). | 2 | 2 |
New Trend Beauty School, Inc. v. Indiana State Board of Beauty Culturist Examinersgreen1 sentence2025See New Trend, 518 N.E.2d at 1108 (ruling that “we, the Courts, are without authority to ‘put something into a statute that Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 24A-PL-2064 | July 24, 2025 Page 16 of 23 the legislature apparently designedly omitted’”) (quoting Poyser v. Stangland, 106 N.E.2d 390, 391 (Ind. 1952)). [33] For these reasons, we conclude that by codifying the exhaustion requirement and creating a specific statutory exception with precisely defined parameters, the legislature demonstrated its intent to supersede the previous common law approach. | 1 | 1 |
Poyser v. Stanglandgreen1 sentence2025See New Trend, 518 N.E.2d at 1108 (ruling that “we, the Courts, are without authority to ‘put something into a statute that Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 24A-PL-2064 | July 24, 2025 Page 16 of 23 the legislature apparently designedly omitted’”) (quoting Poyser v. Stangland, 106 N.E.2d 390, 391 (Ind. 1952)). [33] For these reasons, we conclude that by codifying the exhaustion requirement and creating a specific statutory exception with precisely defined parameters, the legislature demonstrated its intent to supersede the previous common law approach. | 1 | 1 |
Pierce v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See, e.g., Pierce v. State, 761 N.E.2d 826, 830 (Ind. 2002). | 1 | 1 |
Reams v. State Board of Tax Commissionersgreen1 sentence2003Reams v. State Bd. of Tax Comm'rs, 620 N.E.2d 758, 759 (Ind.Tax Ct.1993). 4 . | 1 | 1 |
Lindner Fund v. Abneygreen1 sentence1997Lindner Fund v. Abney, 770 S.W.2d 437, 438 (Mo.App.1989) (explaining Aluma Kraft). | 1 | 1 |
Vore v. Voregreen1 sentence1993See also Vore v. Vore (1990), Ind.App., 563 N.E.2d 154 , aff'd 573 N.E.2d 397 . | 1 | 1 |
Vore v. Voregreen1 sentence1993See also Vore v. Vore (1990), Ind.App., 563 N.E.2d 154 , aff'd 573 N.E.2d 397 . | 1 | 1 |
Munn v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences1980“Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2nd Edition, defines ‘body politic’ as ‘a group organized for government; now usually specif.: a. a state .... b. an organized society, as in a church.’ In Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, the term ‘body politic’ is thus defined: ‘The term is aptly defined in the preamble of the state constitution of Massachusetts as a social compact by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good.’ This definition was quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of th 1980“Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2nd Edition, defines ‘body politic’ as ‘a group organized for government; now usually specif.: a. a state .... b. an organized society, as in a church.’ In Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, the term ‘body politic’ is thus defined: ‘The term is aptly defined in the preamble of the state constitution of Massachusetts as a social compact by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good.’ This definition was quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of th | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dee Ward v. State of Indiana
green
2 sentences2020Id. at 761–62 (footnote and citations omitted). [22] “[P]atient safety is a “critical” part of the comprehensive standard of care for treating victims of domestic violence.” Id. at 763 . 2020Id. at 761–62 (footnote and citations omitted). [22] “[P]atient safety is a “critical” part of the comprehensive standard of care for treating victims of domestic violence.” Id. at 763 . | 2 | 2017–2020 |
Giselbach v. Giselbach
green
2 sentences1993In Giselbach v. Giselbach (1985), Ind.App., 481 N.E.2d 131 , this court construed IC 31-1-11.5 12(b)(1) and concluded that the statute clearly contemplated that the trial court would conduct a comprehensive analysis of the factors enumerated in the statute prior to rendering an order directing payment of expenses. 1990Id. at 134 . | 2 | 1990–1993 |
Kooshtard Property I, LLC v. Monroe County Assessor
green
1 sentence2024Id. at 753 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
green
2 sentences2017Id. at 404 , 132 S.Ct. 2492 (quoting Hoffman, 535 U.S. at 147 , 122 S.Ct. 1275 ). 2017Id. at 404 , 132 S.Ct. 2492 (quoting Hoffman, 535 U.S. at 147 , 122 S.Ct. 1275 ). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Arizona v. United States
green
2 sentences2017Id. at 404 , 132 S.Ct. 2492 (quoting Hoffman, 535 U.S. at 147 , 122 S.Ct. 1275 ). 2017Id. at 404 , 132 S.Ct. 2492 (quoting Hoffman, 535 U.S. at 147 , 122 S.Ct. 1275 ). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Sean Thomas Ryan v. Dee Anna Ryan
green
1 sentence2016Kimberly responds that it was not a modification but an enforcement remedy pursuant to Indiana Code section 31-15-7-10. 3 [12] Recently, our supreme court provided a comprehensive analysis of the law concerning the post-dissolution modification of property distribution between former spouses in Ryan v. Ryan, 972 N.E.2d 359 (Ind.2012). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
LaPORTE COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORP. v. Rosales
green
2 sentences2014Our Supreme Court noted that the challenged instruction was “akin to a comprehensive instruction enumerating the elements of the cause of action on which the plaintiff must sustain her burden of proof in order to prevail.” Id. 2014Such instructions, the Court noted, are “particularly vital to a jury’s ability to understand and apply the law to the facts in each particular case.” Id. at 524 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Betty Deckard v. General Motors Corp.
green
2 sentences2004On remand, we direct the trial court and the parties to Deckard v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 556 (7th Cir.2002), which provides a comprehensive analysis of the parol evidence rule as it relates to releases and third parties under Indiana law. 2004On remand, we direct the trial court and the parties to Deckard v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 556 (7th Cir.2002), which provides a comprehensive analysis of the parol evidence rule as it relates to releases and third parties under Indiana law. [3] I have serious doubts that, with regard to summary judgment proceedings, a magistrate is required to make findings and submit those findings to the regular judge of the court for approval. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Coates v. State
green
2 sentences1991A comprehensive analysis of the "shackled defendant" issue appears in Coates v. State (1985), Ind.App., 487 N.E.2d 167 . 1991From Coates we learn that due process under the federal constitution includes the right of an accused "to appear before a jury free of physical restraints." Id. at 168 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Arnett
green
1 sentence1987Therefore, pursuant to Ind.R.App.P. 11(B)(8), we adopt and incorporate by reference that part of the opinion addressing those issues, Asklond Oil, supra at 1816-20 , and affirm the Court of Appeals' disposition of the appeals from the Jasper, Newton and Marshall County Courts, Id. at 1820-21. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
STUDENT BAR ASS'N BD. OF GOVERNORS, ETC. v. Byrd
green
2 sentences1980In determining whether the Open Meeting Law applied to meetings of a law school faculty, the North Carolina Supreme Court in Student Bar Ass’n Bd. of Governors, etc. v. Byrd (1977) 293 N.C. 594 , 239 S.E.2d 415 presented a comprehensive analysis of the term “body politic” and that discussion seems germane to the issue at bar. 1980In determining whether the Open Meeting Law applied to meetings of a law school faculty, the North Carolina Supreme Court in Student Bar Ass’n Bd. of Governors, etc. v. Byrd (1977) 293 N.C. 594 , 239 S.E.2d 415 presented a comprehensive analysis of the term “body politic” and that discussion seems germane to the issue at bar. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Durham v. Cotton Mills.
green
2 sentences1980“Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2nd Edition, defines ‘body politic’ as ‘a group organized for government; now usually specif.: a. a state .... b. an organized society, as in a church.’ In Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, the term ‘body politic’ is thus defined: ‘The term is aptly defined in the preamble of the state constitution of Massachusetts as a social compact by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good.’ This definition was quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of th 1980“Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2nd Edition, defines ‘body politic’ as ‘a group organized for government; now usually specif.: a. a state .... b. an organized society, as in a church.’ In Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, the term ‘body politic’ is thus defined: ‘The term is aptly defined in the preamble of the state constitution of Massachusetts as a social compact by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good.’ This definition was quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of th | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.