10 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
James C. Purcell v. Old National Bankgreen2 sentences2025“If some evidence exists, a court must then proceed to the qualitative analysis to determine whether the Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 24A-CT-2442 | September 26, 2025 Page 20 of 24 evidence is substantial enough to support a reasonable inference in favor of the non-moving party.” Id. 2014However, “[i]f some evidence exists, a court must then proceed to the qualitative analysis to determine whether the evidence is substantial enough to support a reasonable inference in favor of the non-moving party.” Id. | 1 | 4 |
Court View Centre, LLC v. Wittgreen1 sentence2019See Court View Centre, L.L.C. v. Witt, 753 N.E.2d 75, 81 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (“If evidence fails to create a reasonable inference of an ultimate fact, but merely leaves the possibility of its existence open for surmise, conjecture or Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 19A-PL-582 | December 2, 2019 Page 28 of 30 speculation, then there is no evidence of probative value as to that ultimate fact and a Trial Rule 50 motion should be granted.”).10 [36] Although the facts of this case are undeniably tragic and Mundia has unquestionably suffered harm, the law and the evidence in this case do not | 1 | 1 |
Nash v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2016Accordingly, the Court wrote, “[a]s a general matter, we do not doubt the constitutionality of laws that call for the application of a qualitative standard such as ‘substantial risk’ to real-world conduct; ‘the law is full of instances where a man’s fate depends on his estimating rightly . . . some matter of degree.’” Id. (quoting Nash v. United States, 229 U.S. 373, 377 (1913)). [24] In the present case, the neglect of a dependent statute does not require a court or jury to imagine some abstract “ordinary case.” It instead simply requires the jury to determine if the defendant knowingly place | 1 | 1 |
Dettman v. Sumnergreen2 sentences2012See Dettman v. Sumner, 474 N.E.2d 100 , 104–105 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985) (discussing and applying the two-part analysis of American Optical). 2012See Dettman v. Sumner, 474 N.E.2d 100, 104-105 (Ind.Ct.App.1985) (discussing and applying the two-part analysis of American Optical). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
American Optical Co. v. Weidenhamer
green
2 sentences2023“If some evidence exists, a court must then proceed to the qualitative analysis to determine whether the evidence is substantial enough to support a reasonable inference in favor of the non-moving party.” Id. [11] “Qualitatively, ... [evidence] fails when it cannot be said, with reason, that the intended inference may logically be drawn therefrom; and this may occur either because of an absence of credibility of a witness or because the intended inference may not be drawn therefrom without undue speculation.” American Optical, 457 N.E.2d at 184 . 2023“If some evidence exists, a court must then proceed to the qualitative analysis to determine whether the evidence is substantial enough to support a reasonable inference in favor of the non-moving party.” Id. [11] “Qualitatively, ... [evidence] fails when it cannot be said, with reason, that the intended inference may logically be drawn therefrom; and this may occur either because of an absence of credibility of a witness or because the intended inference may not be drawn therefrom without undue speculation.” American Optical, 457 N.E.2d at 184 . | 5 | 1985–2023 |
Johnson v. United States
green
1 sentence2016Accordingly, the Court wrote, “[a]s a general matter, we do not doubt the constitutionality of laws that call for the application of a qualitative standard such as ‘substantial risk’ to real-world conduct; ‘the law is full of instances where a man’s fate depends on his estimating rightly . . . some matter of degree.’” Id. (quoting Nash v. United States, 229 U.S. 373, 377 (1913)). [24] In the present case, the neglect of a dependent statute does not require a court or jury to imagine some abstract “ordinary case.” It instead simply requires the jury to determine if the defendant knowingly place | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.