appellant demonstrates prima facie error (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

appellant demonstrates prima facie error in Indiana

7 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1991–2015 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Garner v. Kovalakgreen
indctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011Prima facie means “at first sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Garner v. Kovalak, 817 N.E.2d 311, 313 (Ind.Ct.App.2004).

11
Dusenberry v. Dusenberrygreen
indctapp · 1993 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998
1 sentence

1998Dusenberry v. Dusenberry, 625 N.E.2d 458, 460 (Ind.Ct.App.1993).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Fisher v. BD., MT. PLEASANT TP. COM. SCHOOLS green
indctapp · 1986
2 sentences

1991Burroughs v. Burroughs (1913), 180 Ind. 380, 381 , 103 N.E. 1 ; Fisher v. Board of School Trustees (1986), Ind.App., 514 N.E.2d 626, 628 .

1991Burroughs v. Burroughs (1913), 180 Ind. 380, 381 , 103 N.E. 1 ; Fisher v. Board of School Trustees (1986), Ind.App., 514 N.E.2d 626, 628 .

21991–1991
Burroughs v. Burroughs neutral
ind · 1913
2 sentences

1991Burroughs v. Burroughs (1913), 180 Ind. 380, 381 , 103 N.E. 1 ; Fisher v. Board of School Trustees (1986), Ind.App., 514 N.E.2d 626, 628 .

1991Burroughs v. Burroughs (1913), 180 Ind. 380, 381 , 103 N.E. 1 ; Fisher v. Board of School Trustees (1986), Ind.App., 514 N.E.2d 626, 628 .

21991–1991
Mullen v. Town of Newcastle neutral
ind · 1913
2 sentences

1991Burroughs v. Burroughs (1913), 180 Ind. 380, 381 , 103 N.E. 1 ; Fisher v. Board of School Trustees (1986), Ind.App., 514 N.E.2d 626, 628 .

1991Burroughs v. Burroughs (1913), 180 Ind. 380, 381 , 103 N.E. 1 ; Fisher v. Board of School Trustees (1986), Ind.App., 514 N.E.2d 626, 628 .

21991–1991
Bartrom v. Adjustment Bureau, Inc. green
ind · 1993
1 sentence

2015Instead, we will reverse the trial court’s 2 Kevin’s assertion that Bartrom v. Credit Adjustment Bureau, 618 N.E.2d 1 (Ind. 1993) is inconsistent with Roberts is in error as Bartrom deals with the doctrine of necessaries and married couples. 3 This theory presumably would not apply if a prenuptial agreement had been made, but the parties have not indicated there was any such agreement. 4 Child support and spousal maintenance are governed by the same statutes. 5 judgment if the appellant demonstrates prima facie error.

12015–2015
TISDIAL v. Young green
indctapp · 2010
1 sentence

2012Id. at 784-85 .

12012–2012
Bergman v. Zempel green
indctapp · 2004
1 sentence

2005Bergman, 807 N.E.2d at 149 .

12005–2005

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check