17 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1893–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Idle v. Stategreen2 sentences2005To that end, we are generally concerned only with insuring that the defendant had an opportunity to examine the report and challenge any inaccuracies contained therein, pursuant to I.C. $ 35-38-1-12(b). 4 See Idle v. State, 587 N.E.2d 712 (Ind.Ct.App.1992), trans. denied. 2005See Idle v. State, 587 N.E.2d 712 (Ind.Ct.App.1992), trans. denied. | 1 | 2 |
Keyaunna Hurley v. State of Indianagreen1 sentence2018See 260 I.A.C. 2-4-1. 4 The State relies on Hurley v. State , 75 N.E.3d 1074 , 1080 (Ind. 2017), to support its assertion that "[o]ur Supreme Court has interpreted [260 Indiana Administrative Code 2-4-2 ] to 'presumptively require[ ]' a second test to be administered if the first attempt at administration should fail, provided that the suspect is not refusing the test." Appellee's Br. at 17. | 1 | 1 |
A.J. v. Logansport State Hospitalgreen1 sentence2015In other words, “the purpose of the report requirement of Section 12-26-7-3(b) is to insure that . . . qualified persons have evaluated the individual and determined that commitment to a state institution is appropriate.” A.J. v. Logansport State Hospital, 956 N.E.2d 96, 108 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). [24] We first observe that J.E. did not raise an objection at his hearing that placement at a state psychiatric hospital, specifically LSH, was inappropriate. | 1 | 1 |
Swaynie v. Stategreen1 sentence2013“Rulings on motions in limine are not final decisions and, therefore, do not preserve errors for appeal.” Swaynie v. State, 762 N.E.2d 112, 113 (Ind. 2002). | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Stategreen1 sentence2001First, we reiterate the general proposition that "[wlhile a trial court certainly must take into account any established mitigating circumstances, a court does not err in failing to find mitigation when a mitigation claim is 'highly disputable in nature, weight, or significance." " Smith v. State, 670 N.E.2d 7, 8 (Ind.1996) (quoting Wilkins v. State, 500 N.E.2d 747, 749 (Ind.1986)). | 1 | 1 |
Wilkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2001First, we reiterate the general proposition that "[wlhile a trial court certainly must take into account any established mitigating circumstances, a court does not err in failing to find mitigation when a mitigation claim is 'highly disputable in nature, weight, or significance." " Smith v. State, 670 N.E.2d 7, 8 (Ind.1996) (quoting Wilkins v. State, 500 N.E.2d 747, 749 (Ind.1986)). | 1 | 1 |
Carlin v. Stategreen2 sentences1990See Carlin v. State (1970), 254 Ind. 332 , 259 N.E.2d 870 ; Glenn v. State (1975), 163 Ind.App. 119 , 322 N.E.2d 106 . 1990See Carlin v. State (1970), 254 Ind. 332 , 259 N.E.2d 870 ; Glenn v. State (1975), 163 Ind.App. 119 , 322 N.E.2d 106 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Winkler v. V.G. Reed & Sons, Inc.
green
2 sentences2006Id. 2006Id. | 2 | 2004–2006 |
Coutee v. Lafayette Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc.
green
1 sentence2020Coutee, 792 N.E.2d at 914 . [24] In addition, Brown argued that his emails contained a report of a violation of law: that IDEM was reporting false data to the EPA. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Dillard v. State
green
1 sentence2005"To that end, we are generally concerned only with insuring that the defendant had an opportunity to examine the report and challenge any inaccuracies container therein." Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Matter of Shumate
green
1 sentence1996In re Shumate, 647 N.E.2d 321 (Ind.1995), In re Huebner, 561 N.E.2d 492 (Ind.1990). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Matter of Huebner
green
1 sentence1996In re Shumate, 647 N.E.2d 321 (Ind.1995), In re Huebner, 561 N.E.2d 492 (Ind.1990). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Matter of Gemmer
green
1 sentence1995In re Gemmer (1991), Ind., 566 N.E.2d 528 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Glenn v. State
green
2 sentences1990See Carlin v. State (1970), 254 Ind. 332 , 259 N.E.2d 870 ; Glenn v. State (1975), 163 Ind.App. 119 , 322 N.E.2d 106 . 1990See Carlin v. State (1970), 254 Ind. 332 , 259 N.E.2d 870 ; Glenn v. State (1975), 163 Ind.App. 119 , 322 N.E.2d 106 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Oliver v. Morrison
green
1 sentence1984Assuming for our purposes admission of the report was error, we find Judge Ratliff's analysis in Oliver v. Morrison, (1982) Ind. App., 431 N.E.2d 140 persuasive on this issue: We have determined that Oliver has made a compelling case for relief from the obvious injustice which has been done him by virtue of the special judge's ordering a new trial. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Pooley v. State
green
2 sentences1965In Pooley v. State (1945), 116 Ind. App. 199, 205 , 62 N. E. 2d 484, 486 , a case involving juvenile delinquency, there was objection to the testimony of a witness to support the special findings of fact and decision of the court because it was pure hearsay. 1965In Pooley v. State (1945), 116 Ind. App. 199, 205 , 62 N. E. 2d 484, 486 , a case involving juvenile delinquency, there was objection to the testimony of a witness to support the special findings of fact and decision of the court because it was pure hearsay. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Bentley v. Brown
neutral
1 sentence1901Bentley, Adm., v. Brown, 123 Ind. 552 ; City of LaPorte v. Organ, 5 Ind. App. 369 ; Swift, Adm., v. Harley, 20 Ind. App. 614 . | 1 | 1901–1901 |
City of La Porte v. Organ
green
1 sentence1901Bentley, Adm., v. Brown, 123 Ind. 552 ; City of LaPorte v. Organ, 5 Ind. App. 369 ; Swift, Adm., v. Harley, 20 Ind. App. 614 . | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Swift v. Harley
green
1 sentence1901Bentley, Adm., v. Brown, 123 Ind. 552 ; City of LaPorte v. Organ, 5 Ind. App. 369 ; Swift, Adm., v. Harley, 20 Ind. App. 614 . | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Zigler v. Menges
green
1 sentence1893It is insisted by the appellees’ counsel that, under the authority of Zigler v. Menges, 121 Ind. 99 , “ the decision of the commissioners of drainage is analogous to the decision of the common council of a city, upon the question of benefits from the construction of sewers, it is final in each particular proceeding, in the absence of fraud.” But we do not think that case is decisive of this, because the objections to the report here challenge the legality of the report on it face, and the competency of one of the commissioners to act, and charge the commissioners with misconduct in connection | 1 | 1893–1893 |
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.