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.
17 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sullivan v. American Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa.green2 sentences2015Co., 605 N.E.2d 134, 137 (Ind. 1992)). 2014Co., 605 N.E.2d 134, 137 (Ind. 1992)). | 6 | 8 |
Gill v. Pollertgreen2 sentences2015Res judicata dictates that “a judgment rendered on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action between the same parties or those in privity with them on the same claim or demand.” Gill v. Pollert, 810 N.E.2d 1050, 1057 (Ind. 2004) (quoting Sullivan v. American Cas. 2014State v. Holmes, 728 N.E.2d 164, 168 (Ind. 2000). 4 Res judicata dictates that “a judgment rendered on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action between the same parties or those in privity with them on the same claim or demand.” Gill v. Pollert, 810 N.E.2d 1050, 1057 (Ind. 2004) (quoting Sullivan v. American Cas. | 4 | 4 |
Mutchman v. Consolidation Coal Co.green2 sentences2000The law of res judicata “operates to ‘preclude litigation regarding matters which have already been litigated.... [A] judgment on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action between the same parties on the same claim.’ ” New Haven v. Chemical Waste Management, L.L.C., 701 N.E.2d 912, 928-24 (Ind.Ct.App.1998), trans. denied (quoting Mutchman v. Consolidation Coal Co., 666 N.E.2d 461, 464 (Ind.Ct.App.1996)). 2000The law of res judicata "operates to `preclude litigation regarding matters which have already been litigated.... [A] judgment on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action between the same parties on the same claim.'" New Haven v. Chemical Waste Management, L.L.C., 701 N.E.2d 912, 923-24 (Ind.Ct.App.1998), trans. denied (quoting Mutchman v. Consolidation Coal Co., 666 N.E.2d 461, 464 (Ind.Ct.App.1996)). | 3 | 4 |
Smith v. Stategreen2 sentences2014Smith v. State, 825 N.E.2d 783, 789 (Ind. 2005). 2013Smith v. State, 825 N.E.2d 783, 789 (Ind. 2005). | 2 | 2 |
City of New Haven v. Chemical Waste Management of Indiana, L.L.C.green2 sentences2000The law of res judicata “operates to ‘preclude litigation regarding matters which have already been litigated.... [A] judgment on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action between the same parties on the same claim.’ ” New Haven v. Chemical Waste Management, L.L.C., 701 N.E.2d 912, 928-24 (Ind.Ct.App.1998), trans. denied (quoting Mutchman v. Consolidation Coal Co., 666 N.E.2d 461, 464 (Ind.Ct.App.1996)). 2000The law of res judicata "operates to `preclude litigation regarding matters which have already been litigated.... [A] judgment on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action between the same parties on the same claim.'" New Haven v. Chemical Waste Management, L.L.C., 701 N.E.2d 912, 923-24 (Ind.Ct.App.1998), trans. denied (quoting Mutchman v. Consolidation Coal Co., 666 N.E.2d 461, 464 (Ind.Ct.App.1996)). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Holmesgreen1 sentence2014State v. Holmes, 728 N.E.2d 164, 168 (Ind. 2000). 4 Res judicata dictates that “a judgment rendered on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action between the same parties or those in privity with them on the same claim or demand.” Gill v. Pollert, 810 N.E.2d 1050, 1057 (Ind. 2004) (quoting Sullivan v. American Cas. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence2002Res judicata provides that a judgment on the merits is an absolute bar to a subsequent action on the same claim between the same parties. 715 N.E.2d at 886 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Hutchinson v. State
green
1 sentence1998Judicial notice, however, deals with facts and relieves “the party having the burden of establishing a fact from the necessity of producing formal proof.” Hutchinson v. State (1985) Ind., 477 N.E.2d 850, 854 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Town of Flora v. Indiana Service Corp.
green
2 sentences1992Town of Flora v. Indiana Service Corp. (1944), 222 Ind. 253, 256 , 53 N.E.2d 161, 163 . 1992Town of Flora v. Indiana Service Corp. (1944), 222 Ind. 253, 256 , 53 N.E.2d 161, 163 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.