17 Indiana opinions name it 3 courts 1998–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Buhring v. Tavolettigreen2 sentences2025See, e.g., Buhring v. Tavoletti, 905 N.E.2d 1059, 1068 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (reversing and remanding for a new trial, because misleading or incorrect statements of law had a significant likelihood of impacting the outcome of the case). 2025See, e.g., Buhring v. Tavoletti, 905 N.E.2d 1059, 1068 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (reversing and remanding for a new trial, because misleading or incorrect statements of law had a significant likelihood of impacting the outcome of the case). | 2 | 2 |
Peterson v. Lambertgreen2 sentences2013Mail Clerk, 922 N.E.2d 121, 122-23 (Ind.Ct.App.2010) (quoting Peterson v. Lambert, 885 N.E.2d 719, 720 (Ind.Ct.App.2008)). 2009See McPeek v. McCardle, 888 N.E.2d 171, 173 (Ind.2008); Peterson v. Lambert, 885 N.E.2d 719, 721 (Ind.Ct.App.2008). | 2 | 2 |
Woods v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Id. [8] Because a probation revocation proceeding is civil in nature, the State need only prove the alleged probation violation by a preponderance of the evidence. 2019Id. | 1 | 7 |
Smith v. Huckinsgreen2 sentences2008Id. § 34-58-1-2. 2008Id. § 34-58-1-2. | 1 | 2 |
Smith v. Wrigleygreen1 sentence2016In Smith v. Wrigley, our court adopted the United States Supreme Court’s interpretation of factually frivolous claims as those “describing fantastic or delusional scenarios.” 908 N.E.2d 354, 358 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). | 1 | 1 |
Guillen v. R.D.C. Mail Clerkgreen1 sentence2013Mail Clerk, 922 N.E.2d 121, 122-23 (Ind.Ct.App.2010) (quoting Peterson v. Lambert, 885 N.E.2d 719, 720 (Ind.Ct.App.2008)). | 1 | 1 |
McPeek v. McCardlegreen1 sentence2009See McPeek v. McCardle, 888 N.E.2d 171, 173 (Ind.2008); Peterson v. Lambert, 885 N.E.2d 719, 721 (Ind.Ct.App.2008). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Roger S. Blackman v. Karen A. Gholson and James W. Blackman
green
1 sentence2019Id. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Vernon Bagby v. Robert Kuhlman
green
2 sentences2015“If the court determines that the privilege has been invoked with respect to a collateral matter, or that the invocation does not preclude inquiry into the Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 46A04-1407-CR-316 |June 10, 2015 Page 16 of 33 witness’ direct testimony, then the defendant’s right to cross-examine has not been impinged and no corrective action is necessary.” Id. 2015“If the court determines that the privilege has been invoked with respect to a collateral matter, or that the invocation does not preclude inquiry into the witness’ direct testimony, then the defendant’s right to cross-examine has not been impinged and no corrective action is necessary.” Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Hartman v. State
green
1 sentence1998Hartman v. State (1996) Ind., 669 N.E.2d 959 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.