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.
10 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2025 3 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 sentences2024Id. [11] Determining whether evidence is enough to survive a motion for judgment on the evidence “requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis.” Id. at 840 (quoting Am. 2024Id. [11] Determining whether evidence is enough to survive a motion for judgment on the evidence “requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis.” Id. at 840 (quoting Am. | 3 | 7 |
American Optical Co. v. Weidenhamergreen2 sentences2012In that case, this Court stated that determining whether evidence was sufficient “requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis.” American Optical, 457 N.E.2d at 184 . 2012In that case, this Court stated that determining whether evidence was sufficient “requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis.” American Optical, 457 N.E.2d at 184 . | 3 | 6 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Huff v. Travelers Indemnity Co.
green
1 sentence2019“If there is relevant evidence that supports the verdict, a motion for judgment on the evidence is improper because the final determination must be left to the fact-finder.” Id. [10] Determining whether evidence is sufficient to survive a motion for judgment on the evidence “requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis.” Purcell v. Old Nat’l Bank, 972 N.E.2d 835, 840 (Ind. 2012) (quoting Am. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Bals v. Verduzco
green
1 sentence2018Id. (citing Ind. Trial Rule 50(A) ; Johnson v. Naugle , 557 N.E.2d 1339 , 1342 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990) ; Whisman v. Fawcett , 470 N.E.2d 73 , 79 (Ind. 1984) ). [23] Our supreme court has stated that determining whether evidence was sufficient to defeat a motion for judgment on the evidence requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Whisman v. Fawcett
green
1 sentence2018Id. (citing Ind. Trial Rule 50(A) ; Johnson v. Naugle , 557 N.E.2d 1339 , 1342 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990) ; Whisman v. Fawcett , 470 N.E.2d 73 , 79 (Ind. 1984) ). [23] Our supreme court has stated that determining whether evidence was sufficient to defeat a motion for judgment on the evidence requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Johnson v. Naugle
green
1 sentence2018Id. (citing Ind. Trial Rule 50(A) ; Johnson v. Naugle , 557 N.E.2d 1339 , 1342 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990) ; Whisman v. Fawcett , 470 N.E.2d 73 , 79 (Ind. 1984) ). [23] Our supreme court has stated that determining whether evidence was sufficient to defeat a motion for judgment on the evidence requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Mark S. Weinberger, M.D. v. Gloria Gill
green
1 sentence2018Id. [32] The determination of whether the evidence is sufficient to support a party’s contentions requires both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis. | 1 | 2018–2018 |