6 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1975–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Carter v. Nugent Sand Co.green1 sentence2026Our Supreme Court has held that “Indiana courts have long recognized that petitioners may not use the [declaratory judgment] act to sidestep AOPA.” In re R.L., 246 N.E.3d 257 , 264 (Ind. 2024). “‘Where such an administrative remedy is readily available, filing a declaratory judgment action is not a suitable alternative.’” Id. (quoting Carter v. Nugent Sand Co., 925 N.E.2d 356, 360 (Ind. 2010)). | 1 | 1 |
Simon v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2026Indeed, Indiana’s choice of law rules permit a court to “analyze a contract claim and a tort claim independently . . . .” Simon v. United States, 805 N.E.2d 798, 801 (Ind. 2004); see, e.g., Allen v. Great Am. | 1 | 1 |
2444 Acquisitions, LLC v. Michael Fishgreen1 sentence2024Indiana Appellate Rule 2(H)(5) provides that “[a] judgment is a final judgment if . . . it is otherwise deemed final by law.” INDIANA CODE § 34-14-1-1 provides, in part, that a trial court’s order on a declaratory judgment claim or “declaration has the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.” Additionally, our Court has held that “[d]eclaratory orders have the force and effect of a final judgment, and we review them in the same manner as other judgments.” 2444 Acquisitions, LLC v. Fish, 84 N.E.3d 1211, 1214 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). | 1 | 1 |
Smyth v. Hestergreen1 sentence2009Smyth v. Hester, 901 N.E.2d 25, 32 (Ind.Ct.App.2009), reh'g denied, trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. Wells
green
2 sentences1994Thus, this case differs from the subrogation claim before the court in Smith v. Wells (1919), 72 Ind.App. 29 , 122 N.E. 334 . 1994Thus, this case differs from the subrogation claim before the court in Smith v. Wells (1919), 72 Ind.App. 29 , 122 N.E. 334 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Bryarly v. State
green
2 sentences1975The case relied upon by the Attorney General in support of the proposition that declaratory relief is improper as to a criminal statute, Bryarly v. State (1953), 232 Ind. 47 , 111 N.E.2d 277 , held only that a defendant already under prosecution for crime that was mala in se could not file a declaratory judgment to test the constitutionality of the criminal statute. 1975The case relied upon by the Attorney General in support of the proposition that declaratory relief is improper as to a criminal statute, Bryarly v. State (1953), 232 Ind. 47 , 111 N.E.2d 277 , held only that a defendant already under prosecution for crime that was mala in se could not file a declaratory judgment to test the constitutionality of the criminal statute. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
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.