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 1982–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
In re the Marriage of: Thomas Todd Reynolds v. Tricia Reynoldsgreen1 sentence2017Therefore, on remand, we 10 We also remind the trial court that before imposing any sanction for civil contempt—but particularly when the sanction is jail time, Reynolds v. Reynolds, 64 N.E.3d 829, 835 (Ind. 2016)—it “shall, on proper showing,” postpone a show-cause hearing “to give the defendant a reasonable and just opportunity to be purged of the contempt.” I.C. § 34-47-3-5(c) (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Core Funding Group, LLC v. Younggreen1 sentence2011See Core, 792 N.E.2d at 552. | 1 | 1 |
Isler v. Islergreen1 sentence1983See Isler v. Isler, (1981) Ind. App., 422 N.E.2d 416 ; Slagle, supra. We also need not address Funk's concerns over the trial court's issuance of a show cause hearing for possible termination of visitation rights or the court's finding that Funk's conduct had "substantially impaired" the son's emotional development. | 1 | 1 |
In re Marriage of Millergreen2 sentences1983See In re Marriage of Miller, (1983) 112 Ill.App.3d 203 , 68 IIl.Dec. 167, 445 N.E.2d 811 ; Rotheimer v. Rotheimer, (1962) 34 Ill. 1983See In re Marriage of Miller, (1983) 112 Ill.App.3d 203 , 68 IIl.Dec. 167, 445 N.E.2d 811 ; Rotheimer v. Rotheimer, (1962) 34 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gordon v. Purdue University
green
2 sentences2013However, we agree with the trial court that other than these conclusory allegations, Amaya has failed to designate any facts which would support a reasonable inference that IUSM engaged in “the conscious doing of a wrong because of dishonest purpose or moral obliquity” or had “a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or ill will.” Gordon, 862 N.E.2d at 1253 . 2013However, we agree with the trial court that other than these conelusory allegations, Amaya has failed to designate any facts which would support a reasonable inference that IUSM engaged in “the conscious doing of a wrong because of dishonest purpose or moral obliquity” or had “a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or ill will.” Gordon, 862 N.E.2d at 1258 . | 2 | 2013–2013 |
Amaya v. Brater
green
2 sentences2013Id. 2013Id. | 2 | 2013–2013 |
Kathy Dotson v. Stryker Corporation, Brad Bolinger, Patrick Reagan, Jeffrey M. Sheedy, M.D., Rochester Orthopedics, P.C., and Woodlawn Hospital
green
1 sentence2018This lack of promptness is further compounded by the fact that neither Sahara Mart nor Noorihoseini has ever presented an argument that there were inaccuracies in the substance of Noorihoseini's deposition testimony as transcribed. ( See Show Cause Hr'g Tr.; Sahara Mart's Findings.) See also Dotson v. Stryker Corp. , 108 N.E.3d 376 , 381-84 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (finding that the deponent's failure to sign a deposition was not fatal when there were no claimed inaccuracies in the substance of the deponent's testimony). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
City of Gary v. Major
green
1 sentence2015Major, 822 N.E.2d at 171 . [10] Here, the Eskanoses failed to appear at the show cause hearing, and there is no indication or argument that they did not receive notice of it. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Rotheimer v. Rotheimer
green
1 sentence1983See In re Marriage of Miller, (1983) 112 Ill.App.3d 203 , 68 IIl.Dec. 167, 445 N.E.2d 811 ; Rotheimer v. Rotheimer, (1962) 34 Ill. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Cox v. Ubik
green
1 sentence1982While the parties are basically in agreement as to the principles of law set forth above, Caltram nevertheless contends that the trial court’s award of attorney fees was improper since Rowe failed to provide adequate notice that he would seek such relief at the show cause hearing. 1 The situation in the case at bar is markedly different from that of Cox v. Ubik, supra, upon which both parties rely heavily. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
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.