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.
6 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2023 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Arms v. Armsgreen1 sentence2023Because “[p]ast behavior is a valid predictor for future conduct[,]” Arms v. Arms, 803 N.E.2d 1201, 1210 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), the trial court was fully entitled to take Mother’s history into account. | 1 | 1 |
Yoost v. Zalcberggreen1 sentence2018See Yoost, 925 N.E.2d at 771 . | 1 | 1 |
Delbert Heard v. Michael F. Sheahangreen1 sentence2014See Heard v. Sheahan, 253 F.3d 316, 317-20 (7th Cir. 2001) (holding that an inmate’s 42 U.S.C. section 1983 claim for a continuing denial of medical care accrued for limitations purposes on the last date officials refused to treat his condition or on the date the inmate left jail). | 1 | 1 |
Indiana State Employee Appeal Comm. v. Bishop and Harpold/Green, Stowe and Waltersgreen1 sentence2008See Ind. State Employees Appeal Comm'n v. Bishop, 721 N.E.2d 881 (Ind.Ct.App.1999) (requirement that certain State employees work forty hours a week for same pay as others who worked 37.5 hours a week in violation of provisions of the Indiana Administrative Code was a continuing violation), aff'd 741 N.E.2d 1229 (Ind.2001). 6 . | 1 | 1 |
Indiana State Employees Appeal Commission v. Bishopgreen1 sentence2008See Ind. State Employees Appeal Comm'n v. Bishop, 721 N.E.2d 881 (Ind.Ct.App.1999) (requirement that certain State employees work forty hours a week for same pay as others who worked 37.5 hours a week in violation of provisions of the Indiana Administrative Code was a continuing violation), aff'd 741 N.E.2d 1229 (Ind.2001). 6 . | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of NCgreen2 sentences2008The Williams Court held there was a continuing violation because any harm to BCBS was speculative at the time the ordinance was enacted. 581 S.E.2d at 423 . 2008The Williams Court distinguished cases in which the ordinances in question "provided notice at the moment the ordinances were passed that [the plaintiffs] would suffer a specific loss at a specific time.” Id. at 424. 5 . | 1 | 1 |
Sandra M. Speer v. Rand McNally & Company, a Delaware Corporationgreen2 sentences2003Speer v. Rand McNally, 123 F.3d 658, 663 (7th Cir.1997). 2003Speer, 123 F.3d at 663 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Palmer v. Gorecki
green
1 sentence2018Id. [16] Here, the trial court cited to our decision in Yoost, in which we addressed a request to apply the continuing violation doctrine to an abuse of process claim. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Field v. AREA PLAN COM'N OF GRANT CTY., IND.
green
1 sentence1984Id. at 1141 . | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.