first two factors in Indiana

2019Id. [26] As to the first two factors, there is no real dispute that the prior judgment was rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction on the merits.

2018Id. [13] As for the first two factors, the scope of the intrusion was relatively minimal and the manner in which it was conducted was reasonable.

2018Taylor, 944 N.E.2d at 90 .

2018Id.

2018Cooper has done neither.6 And, “although failure to comply with the appellate rules does not necessarily result in waiver of an issue,” waiver is appropriate where, as here, “the noncompliance impedes our appellate review.” In re Moeder, 27 N.E.3d 1089 , 1097 n.4 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), trans. denied. 6 Cooper’s cursory contention in his reply brief that, if Webb applies, the first two factors of the Webb analysis “seem to” be in his favor does not provide cogent argument or legal analysis.

2016Barton, 936 N.E.2d at 852-53 . [20] Regarding the first two factors, the State elected to briefly refer to Anderson’s post-Miranda silence to impeach his novel claim at trial that he and Brooks were attacked by three men and that those men were responsible for the murder.

2013As to the first two factors, none of the trial court’s findings give any indication that it recognized the “presumption that a fit parent acts in his or her child’s best interests,” or gave “special weight ... to a fit parent’s decision to deny or limit visitation.” K.I, 903 N.E.2d at 462 .

1999The first two factors would be that Mary Hall co-owned and lived in a house that contained a drug manufacturing setting, see Ladd, 710 N.E.2d at 190 and Ledcke, 296 N.E.2d at 416, and that the location of the drugs were in close proximity to items owned by Mary Hall see Ladd, 710 N.E.2d at 190 .

1999The first two factors would be that Mary Hall co-owned and lived in a house that contained a drug manufacturing setting, see Ladd, 710 N.E.2d at 190 and Ledcke, 296 N.E.2d at 416, and that the location of the drugs were in close proximity to items owned by Mary Hall see Ladd, 710 N.E.2d at 190 .

1995However, it is worth observing that in our most recent relevant case, Straub v. Todd (1994), Ind., 645 N.E.2d 597 (parent cannot contractually delegate his child support obligation because of important public policy, i.e., ensuring child's ability to receive support from two parents), only the first two factors were discussed explicitly, while the last two were discussed not at all.

1995However, it is worth observing that in our most recent relevant case, Straub v. Todd (1994), Ind., 645 N.E.2d 597 (parent cannot contractually delegate his child support obligation because of important public policy, ie., ensuring child's ability to receive support from two parents), only the first two factors were discussed explicitly, while the last two were discussed not at all.

1992We believe that Judge Sta-ton succinctly balanced the first two factors in his dissenting opinion in Walker, 566 N.E.2d at 1090 .