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.
19 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1866–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bojrab v. John Carr Agencygreen2 sentences2001"The test generally applied when determining whether a suit is barred by claim preclusion is 'whether identical evidence will support the issues involved in both actions."" Bojrab v. John Carr Agency, 597 N.E.2d 376, 378 (Ind.Ct.App.1992) (citation omitted). 2000“The test generally applied when determining whether a suit is barred by claim preclusion is ‘whether identical evidence will support the issues involved in both actions.’ ” Bojrab v. John Carr Agency, 597 N.E.2d 376, 378 (Ind.Ct.App.1992) (citation omitted). | 3 | 3 |
In Re Marriage of Deangreen1 sentence2005For example, "one who is not a party to a suit may not claim the benefits of merger." Dean, 787 N.E.2d at 448 (internal citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Straub v. B.M.T. Ex Rel. Toddgreen1 sentence2005We note that "[alny agreement purporting to contract away these [child support] rights is directly contrary to this State's public policy of protecting the welfare of children ...." Straub v. B.M.T. by Todd, 645 N.E.2d 597, 600 (Ind.1994), reh'g denied. | 1 | 1 |
United Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Groengreen2 sentences1999In United Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Groen, 486 N.E.2d 571, 573 (Ind.Ct.App.1985), reh’g denied, trans. denied, this court noted that: The attorney has by virtue of the retainer or employment alone, the general implied authority to do on behalf of the client all acts in or out of court necessary or incidental to the prosecution or management of the suit or defense or the aeeomplish *252 ment of the purpose for which he was retained. 1999(Emphasis added.) We further found that because of the close identity of an attorney with the client represented, the client would be liable for the torts of the attorney “acting within the scope of his authority.” Id. at 574 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wanda Goodpaster v. City of Indianapolis
green
2 sentences2015The City argues that the appellants should have -been precluded from litigating this suit because the claim was litigated in Goodpaster. 736 F.3d at 1060 . [15] As noted in the facts section above, in Goodpaster , the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Indianapolis No-Smoking Ordinance, finding that the differing treatment of bars and restaurants and specialty tobacco stores was permissible under the Indiana Constitution’s Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause. 736 F.3d at 1060 . 2015The City argues that the appellants should have -been precluded from litigating this suit because the claim was litigated in Goodpaster. 736 F.3d at 1060 . [15] As noted in the facts section above, in Goodpaster , the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Indianapolis No-Smoking Ordinance, finding that the differing treatment of bars and restaurants and specialty tobacco stores was permissible under the Indiana Constitution’s Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause. 736 F.3d at 1060 . | 2 | 2015–2015 |
Cory v. Howard
green
2 sentences1998Cory v. Howard, 88 Ind. App. 503 , [505,] 164 N.E. 639 , [639-40] (1929) (“As the dismissal of a suit does not bar the bringing of another for the same cause of action, the attorney of record has the implied authority to discontinue the action if he sees fit.... 1998Cory v. Howard, 88 Ind. App. 503 , [505,] 164 N.E. 639 , [639-40] (1929) (“As the dismissal of a suit does not bar the bringing of another for the same cause of action, the attorney of record has the implied authority to discontinue the action if he sees fit.... | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Indiana Department of Public Welfare v. Chair Lance Service, Inc.
green
1 sentence1993DPW v. Chair Lance Service, Inc. (1988), Ind., 523 N.E.2d 1373, 1379 . | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Indiana Public Interest Research Group v. City of Bloomington
green
1 sentence1992Id. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Hoffman v. Dunn
green
1 sentence1992The test generally applied when determining whether a suit is barred by claim preclusion is "whether identical evidence will support the issues involved in both actions." Hoffman v. Dunn (1986), Ind.App., 496 N.E.2d 818, 821 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Middelkamp v. Hanewich
green
1 sentence1980Middlekamp v. Hanewich (1977), Ind.App., 364 N.E.2d 1024 . | 1 | 1980–1980 |
McCormick v. McClure
neutral
1 sentence1939In an early case, McCormick et al. v. McClure et al. (1843), 6 Blackf. 466, 468 , it was held by this court that: “After the decree, and before the commencement of the suit in error, the suit in which the decree was rendered was not pending; and the land during that period, might be, bona fide, purchased for a valuable consideration from the complainant, and the title of the purchaser, and of those claiming under him, would not be affected by the subsequent reversal of the decree.” This case has never been expressly reversed, perhaps because it deals with a writ of error, and the later cases d | 1 | 1939–1939 |
Jones v. Canon
green
1 sentence1937In Jones v. Canon et al. (1933), 3 F. Supp. 49 (D. | 1 | 1937–1937 |
Bacon v. Mitchell
green
2 sentences1929As the dismissal of a suit does not bar the bringing of another for the same cause of action, the attorney of record has the implied authority to discontinue the action if he sees fit. 4 Cyc 936; Bacon v. Mitchell (1905), 14 N. D. 454 , 106 N. W. 129 ,4 L. 1929As the dismissal of a suit does not bar the bringing of another for the same cause of action, the attorney of record has the implied authority to discontinue the action if he sees fit. 4 Cyc 936; Bacon v. Mitchell (1905), 14 N. D. 454 , 106 N. W. 129 ,4 L. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Rehm v. German Insurance & Savings Institution
neutral
2 sentences1897The contract in Rhem v. German, etc., Saving Inst., supra, and the contract in the suit at bar are common law contracts for services. 1897Neither are upon a contract of insurance under the purview of the statutes of 1883, supra,■ as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Rhem v. German, etc., Saving Inst., supra. Cross-errors were assigned by appellee, but as we do not deem it necessary to consider them, we have not set out the part of the record which relates thereto. | 1 | 1897–1897 |
State Bank v. Tweedy
neutral
1 sentence1893This has been the rule in this State since the decision in the case of State Bank v. Tweedy, 8 Blackf. 447 , and has been uniformly so held whenever the question has been pre sented. | 1 | 1893–1893 |
Vanduyn v. Hepner
green
1 sentence1883Vanduyn v. Hepner, 45 Ind. 589 , was an action for the recovery of the possession of real estate, brought by one to whom, in 1838, it had been sold and conveyed by the sheriff under an execution on a judgment against Hepner, who theretofore had purchased and paid for the land and caused it to be conveyed to the defendants, his sons, to defraud his creditors. | 1 | 1883–1883 |
Davis v. Crow
green
1 sentence1866This court so held in Comegys v. The State Bank, 6 Ind. 357 , and Davis et al. v. Crow, 7 Blackf. 129 . | 1 | 1866–1866 |
Comegys v. State Bank
neutral
1 sentence1866This court so held in Comegys v. The State Bank, 6 Ind. 357 , and Davis et al. v. Crow, 7 Blackf. 129 . | 1 | 1866–1866 |
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.