purview clause in Indiana

7 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1862–1997 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)

Case	Followed	Cited
Koch v. Jamesgreen indctapp · 1993 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997 1 sentence 1997Cf. Koch v. James, 616 N.E.2d 759, 760 (Ind.Ct.App.1993) (interlocutory appeal permitted when shift of control of asset may result in material changes which could not be remedied by a later appeal).	1	1
Link v. Sun Oil Companygreen indctapp · 1974 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1976–1976 1 sentence 1976To limit the rule to only those situations in which there has been an actual sale would be to circumscribe the rule to such an extent that its purpose might be defeated." [3] Accord, Link v. Sun Oil Co. (1st Dist. 1974), Ind. App., 312 N.E.2d 126, 130 (trans. den.) It cannot be denied that Old Town is in the business of placing its apartments "on the market" within contemplation of the above-cited cases. [4] In addition to pointing to the fact that Old Town leases rather than sells its apartments as a reason for not applying strict liability, Judge Buchanan's opinion cites the "dissimilarities	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (9)

Case	Cited	Years
Shull v. B.F. Goodrich Co. green indctapp · 1985 1 sentence 1990Shull, supra. Once a plaintiff presents sufficient evidence to bring himself within the purview of the doctrine, the defendant is given the burden of going forward with evidence to explain the accident; but, the burden of proof does not shift.	1	1990–1990
Brady v. Maryland green scotus · 1963 2 sentences 1988While the rule stated in Brady v. Maryland (1963), 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 , requires the prosecutor to turn over to the defendant any possibly exculpatory evidence, the present situation does not come within the purview of that rule. 1988While the rule stated in Brady v. Maryland (1963), 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 , requires the prosecutor to turn over to the defendant any possibly exculpatory evidence, the present situation does not come within the purview of that rule.	1	1988–1988
State Ex Rel. Blood v. Gibson Circuit Court green ind · 1959 2 sentences 1960Blood et al. v. Gibson Circuit Court (1959), 239 Ind. 394 , 157 N. E. 2d 475 . 1960Blood et al. v. Gibson Circuit Court (1959), 239 Ind. 394 , 157 N. E. 2d 475 .	1	1960–1960
Stubing v. . Stubing neutral ny · 1891 1 sentence 1933Jaseph v. Schnepper (1890), 1 Ind. App. 154 , 27 N. E. 805 ; Berry v. Berry (1897), 147 Ind. 176 , 46 N. E. 470 ; Burkett et al. v. Holman (1885), 104 Ind. 6 , 3 N. E. 406 ; Vol. 1, Burns 1926, section 256; Strong v. The State ex rel. (1877), 57 Ind. 428 .	1	1933–1933
Strong v. State ex rel. Attorney General neutral ind · 1877 1 sentence 1933Jaseph v. Schnepper (1890), 1 Ind. App. 154 , 27 N. E. 805 ; Berry v. Berry (1897), 147 Ind. 176 , 46 N. E. 470 ; Burkett et al. v. Holman (1885), 104 Ind. 6 , 3 N. E. 406 ; Vol. 1, Burns 1926, section 256; Strong v. The State ex rel. (1877), 57 Ind. 428 .	1	1933–1933
Burkett v. Holman green ind · 1885 2 sentences 1933Jaseph v. Schnepper (1890), 1 Ind. App. 154 , 27 N. E. 805 ; Berry v. Berry (1897), 147 Ind. 176 , 46 N. E. 470 ; Burkett et al. v. Holman (1885), 104 Ind. 6 , 3 N. E. 406 ; Vol. 1, Burns 1926, section 256; Strong v. The State ex rel. (1877), 57 Ind. 428 . 1933Jaseph v. Schnepper (1890), 1 Ind. App. 154 , 27 N. E. 805 ; Berry v. Berry (1897), 147 Ind. 176 , 46 N. E. 470 ; Burkett et al. v. Holman (1885), 104 Ind. 6 , 3 N. E. 406 ; Vol. 1, Burns 1926, section 256; Strong v. The State ex rel. (1877), 57 Ind. 428 .	1	1933–1933
Berry v. Berry green ind · 1897 2 sentences 1933Jaseph v. Schnepper (1890), 1 Ind. App. 154 , 27 N. E. 805 ; Berry v. Berry (1897), 147 Ind. 176 , 46 N. E. 470 ; Burkett et al. v. Holman (1885), 104 Ind. 6 , 3 N. E. 406 ; Vol. 1, Burns 1926, section 256; Strong v. The State ex rel. (1877), 57 Ind. 428 . 1933Jaseph v. Schnepper (1890), 1 Ind. App. 154 , 27 N. E. 805 ; Berry v. Berry (1897), 147 Ind. 176 , 46 N. E. 470 ; Burkett et al. v. Holman (1885), 104 Ind. 6 , 3 N. E. 406 ; Vol. 1, Burns 1926, section 256; Strong v. The State ex rel. (1877), 57 Ind. 428 .	1	1933–1933
Jaseph v. Schnepper green indctapp · 1891 1 sentence 1933Jaseph v. Schnepper (1890), 1 Ind. App. 154 , 27 N. E. 805 ; Berry v. Berry (1897), 147 Ind. 176 , 46 N. E. 470 ; Burkett et al. v. Holman (1885), 104 Ind. 6 , 3 N. E. 406 ; Vol. 1, Burns 1926, section 256; Strong v. The State ex rel. (1877), 57 Ind. 428 .	1	1933–1933
Brinnaman v. Grover neutral ind · 1961 1 sentence 1862"We have, however, decided the question under consideration, vide Brinnarrtan v. Grover, 16 Ind. 347 .	1	1862–1862

Where else courts name it

OH 74 (1958–2026) FL 49 (1941–2015) NY 47 (1882–2026) CA 40 (1893–2018) TX 32 (1928–2023) IL 29 (1896–2022) PA 19 (1895–2022) MI 17 (1947–2025) MO 16 (1881–2022) NC 15 (1948–2013) GA 12 (1907–1987) OK 11 (1929–2016) NJ 9 (1886–2009) AL 8 (1932–2016) NE 7 (1900–1993) MA 7 (1975–2026) IN 7 (1862–1997) UT 7 (1953–2023) KY 7 (1962–2021) RI 6 (1958–2004) MD 6 (1985–2013) MT 6 (1926–1980) IA 6 (1922–2011) WA 6 (1950–2021) ID 5 (1891–2012) MN 5 (1960–2014) NV 4 (1869–2022) VA 4 (1953–1999) NM 4 (1933–2010) AR 4 (1987–2017) LA 4 (1929–1994) AZ 3 (1945–1970) ND 3 (1896–2015) HI 3 (1943–1999) CO 3 (1967–1985) WI 3 (1922–1991) CT 3 (1942–1998) KS 2 (1971–2020) WV 2 (1973–1982) SC 2 (1947–2018) OR 2 (1905–1913)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check