15 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1883–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Windgate Properties, LLC v. Chris Sandersgreen2 sentences2020Id. 2020Id. [14] Husband appeals following the trial court’s denial of his motion to correct error. | 2 | 7 |
Indiana Family and Social Services Administration v. Walgreen Co.green2 sentences2007Admin. v. Walgreen Co., 769 N.E.2d 158, 162 (Ind.2002), where our supreme court stated This Court has indicated that a relaxed standard may sometimes be applied for clear, uncontested unlawful conduct. 2004Indiana Family and Social Services Admin. v. Walgreen Co., 769 N.E.2d 158, 162 (Ind.2002); Schrenker v. Clifford, 270 Ind. 525, 529 , 387 N.E.2d 59, 61 (Ind.1979). | 2 | 2 |
Schrenker v. Cliffordgreen2 sentences2004Indiana Family and Social Services Admin. v. Walgreen Co., 769 N.E.2d 158, 162 (Ind.2002); Schrenker v. Clifford, 270 Ind. 525, 529 , 387 N.E.2d 59, 61 (Ind.1979). 2004But because parties are relieved of several showings usually necessary to obtain injunctive relief, this relaxed standard "is only proper when it is clear that [a] statute has been violated." Id. (quoting Union Township Sch. | 2 | 2 |
Smylie v. Stategreen1 sentence2014The testimony in question, if vouching, was permissible pursuant to the more relaxed standard for admissibility in place prior to Hoglund. “‘An attorney is not required to anticipate changes in the law and object accordingly’ in order to be considered effective.” Smylie v. State, 823 N.E.2d 679, 690 (Ind. 2005) (quoting Fulmer v. State, 523 N.E.2d 754, 757-58 (Ind. 1988)). | 1 | 1 |
Fulmer v. Stategreen1 sentence2014The testimony in question, if vouching, was permissible pursuant to the more relaxed standard for admissibility in place prior to Hoglund. “‘An attorney is not required to anticipate changes in the law and object accordingly’ in order to be considered effective.” Smylie v. State, 823 N.E.2d 679, 690 (Ind. 2005) (quoting Fulmer v. State, 523 N.E.2d 754, 757-58 (Ind. 1988)). | 1 | 1 |
Union Township School Corp. v. State Ex Rel. Joycegreen1 sentence2004See id. | 1 | 1 |
Tilley v. Robersongreen1 sentence2004Tilley v. Roberson, 725 N.E.2d 150, 153-54 (Ind.Ct.App.2000). (7) Where the conduct sought to be enjoined is clearly in violation of a statute, courts have adopted a more relaxed standard that relieves a party moving for preliminary injunctive relief from demonstrating two of these elements. | 1 | 1 |
Poling v. Stategreen1 sentence2002Id. at 5, citing Poling v. State, 740 N.E.2d 872, 878 (Ind.Ct.App.2000). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wiggins v. Smith, Warden
green
2 sentences2007Id. at 536-37 , 123 S.Ct. 2527 . 2007Id. at 536-37 , 123 S.Ct. 2527 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Barclay v. Richard W. Howell's Lessee
green
1 sentence1883Talbot v. Wheeler, 4 Day, 448 ; Barclay v. Howell, 6 Pet. 498 ; Tyler Eject. 393, et seq. | 1 | 1883–1883 |
Talbot v. Wheeler
neutral
1 sentence1883Talbot v. Wheeler, 4 Day, 448 ; Barclay v. Howell, 6 Pet. 498 ; Tyler Eject. 393, et seq. | 1 | 1883–1883 |
Whittelsey v. Beall
neutral
1 sentence1883This relaxed rule in ejectment was recognized in Whittelsey v. Beall, supra, where it was said, per Sullivan, J., that in a sale of land on execution the case was different; that then'the sheriff, at his own peril, must enter upon and sell the right land. | 1 | 1883–1883 |
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.