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 1897–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Marriage of Kraft v. Kraftgreen1 sentence2019In re Marriage of Kraft, 868 N.E.2d 1181, 1187-88 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (citations omitted). [25] The Indiana Child Support Guidelines provide that “where taxes vary significantly from the assumed rate of 21.88 percent, a trial court may choose to deviate from the guideline amount where the variance is supported by evidence at the support hearing.” Ind. Child Support Guideline 1. | 1 | 1 |
Haley v. Haleygreen1 sentence2003See, eg., Haley v. Haley, 771 N.E.2d 743, 752-53 (Ind.Ct.App.2002) (holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in selection of retroactive date for increased support by non-custodial parent when date was after petition was filed and after change in circumstances justifying increased support). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Clemens v. State
green
2 sentences1998Clemens , 610 N.E.2d at 241 . 1997Clemens, 610 N.E.2d at 241 . | 2 | 1997–1998 |
James Bogner v. Teresa Bogner
green
1 sentence2018Id. at 739 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Boyle v. United Technologies Corp.
green
2 sentences1990Boyle v. United Technologies Corp. (1988), 487 U.S. 500 , 108 S.Ct. 2510 , 101 L.Ed.2d 442 . . 26 U.S.C. § 152 (e) provides in pertinent part: (e) Support test in case of child of divorced parents, etc.- (1) Custodial parent gets exemption. -Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, if- (A) a child (as defined in section 151(c)(3)) receives over half of his support during the calendar year from his parents- (i) who are divorced or legally separated under a decree of divorce or separate maintenance, (ii) who are separated under a written separation agreement, or (iii) who live apart at a 1990Boyle v. United Technologies Corp. (1988), 487 U.S. 500 , 108 S.Ct. 2510 , 101 L.Ed.2d 442 . . 26 U.S.C. § 152 (e) provides in pertinent part: (e) Support test in case of child of divorced parents, etc.- (1) Custodial parent gets exemption. -Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, if- (A) a child (as defined in section 151(c)(3)) receives over half of his support during the calendar year from his parents- (i) who are divorced or legally separated under a decree of divorce or separate maintenance, (ii) who are separated under a written separation agreement, or (iii) who live apart at a | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Duckworth v. Duckworth
green
2 sentences1961Duckworth v. Duckworth (1932), 203 Ind. 276, 281 , 179 N. E. 773 . 1961Duckworth v. Duckworth (1932), 203 Ind. 276, 281 , 179 N. E. 773 . | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Connell v. State
green
2 sentences1960In Connell v. State (1939), 215 Ind. 318 , 19 N. E. 2d 267 , the principle was again reiterated in this State. 1960In Connell v. State (1939), 215 Ind. 318 , 19 N. E. 2d 267 , the principle was again reiterated in this State. | 1 | 1960–1960 |
Samuel M. Lawder & Sons Co. v. AlBert MacKie Grocery Co.
neutral
2 sentences1910St. 712); “Two pound, Quail Tomatoes” (Lawder & Sons Co. v. Mackie Grocery Co. [1903], 97 Md. 1 , 54 Atl. 634 , 62 L. 1910St. 712); “Two pound, Quail Tomatoes” (Lawder & Sons Co. v. Mackie Grocery Co. [1903], 97 Md. 1 , 54 Atl. 634 , 62 L. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Waeber v. . Talbot
green
2 sentences1910The appellee cites, in the support of the instruction, cases where a contract was made for some article manufactured by the vendor, and known by a distinctive name given to it by him, as “Talbot Extra Fine Peas, Sieve 23-24” (Waeber v. Talbot [1901], 167 N. Y. 48 , 60 N. E. 288 , 82 Am. 1910The appellee cites, in the support of the instruction, cases where a contract was made for some article manufactured by the vendor, and known by a distinctive name given to it by him, as “Talbot Extra Fine Peas, Sieve 23-24” (Waeber v. Talbot [1901], 167 N. Y. 48 , 60 N. E. 288 , 82 Am. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Simmons v. State
neutral
1 sentence1897The instruction in question was not framed so as to present to the jury the correct test to be applied by them in determining the credit or weight to be given to the confession as evidence, and was properly refused by the trial court. .In addition to the authorities cited in the original opinion the following support the rule herein asserted: Young v. State, 68 Ala. 569 ; 3 Rice on Evidence, section 314; Simmons v. State, 61 Miss. 243 . | 1 | 1897–1897 |
Young v. State
neutral
1 sentence1897The instruction in question was not framed so as to present to the jury the correct test to be applied by them in determining the credit or weight to be given to the confession as evidence, and was properly refused by the trial court. .In addition to the authorities cited in the original opinion the following support the rule herein asserted: Young v. State, 68 Ala. 569 ; 3 Rice on Evidence, section 314; Simmons v. State, 61 Miss. 243 . | 1 | 1897–1897 |
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.