stronger presumption (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

stronger presumption in Indiana

6 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1869–2009 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 (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana.

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 (11)

CaseCitedYears
Wyeth v. Levine green
scotus · 2009
2 sentences

2009The manufacturer argued that the FDCA "establishes both a floor and ceiling ...:[oOInce the FDA has approved a drug's label, a state-law verdict may not deem the label inadequate. ..." Id.

2009The manufacturer argued that the FDCA "establishes both a floor and ceiling ...:[o]nce the FDA has approved a drug's label, a state-law verdict may not deem the label inadequate...." Id.

12009–2009
Stultz v. Stultz red
indctapp · 1994
1 sentence

1995The Court of Appeals held that what it called ""the general statutory prescription" requiring consideration of the standard of living the children would have enjoyed had the parents not divorced "must yield to the specific rule set out in Poynter." Stultz, 644 N.E.2d at 592 n. 1.

11995–1995
O'Neal v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad neutral
ala · 1903
1 sentence

1914Co. (1903), 140 Ala. 378, 386 , 37 South. 275 , 1 Ann.

11914–1914
Carman v. . Pultz neutral
· 1860
1 sentence

1893In Rapp v. Kester, 125 Ind. 79 , Coffey, Judge, speaking for the court, says: “Every presumption ■ in favor of the correctness of the rulings of the trial court is indulged in by this court, and unless the record affirmatively discloses an error of which complaint is made, the judgment from which the appeal is prosecuted will be affirmed.” Myers v. Murphy, 60 Ind. 282 ; Carman v. Pultz, 21 N. Y. 547 .

11893–1893
Myers v. Murphy green
ind · 1878
1 sentence

1893In Rapp v. Kester, 125 Ind. 79 , Coffey, Judge, speaking for the court, says: “Every presumption ■ in favor of the correctness of the rulings of the trial court is indulged in by this court, and unless the record affirmatively discloses an error of which complaint is made, the judgment from which the appeal is prosecuted will be affirmed.” Myers v. Murphy, 60 Ind. 282 ; Carman v. Pultz, 21 N. Y. 547 .

11893–1893
Elmore v. Overton green
ind · 1886
1 sentence

1893While it is true that there is a presumption that such a record was made because it ought to have been made (Elmore v. Overton, 104 Ind. 548 ), still there is also a presumption, and this is the stronger presumption, that the action of the trial court was correct.

11893–1893
Rapp v. Kester neutral
ind · 1890
1 sentence

1893In Rapp v. Kester, 125 Ind. 79 , Coffey, Judge, speaking for the court, says: “Every presumption ■ in favor of the correctness of the rulings of the trial court is indulged in by this court, and unless the record affirmatively discloses an error of which complaint is made, the judgment from which the appeal is prosecuted will be affirmed.” Myers v. Murphy, 60 Ind. 282 ; Carman v. Pultz, 21 N. Y. 547 .

11893–1893
Whitney v. State neutral
ind · 1871
1 sentence

1890Statements in the case of Whitney v. State, 35 Ind. 503 , which indicate, or assert, a doctrine Opposed to that stated are not defensible, and can not be approved, .for a stronger rule against the prosecution is there laid down than reason or authority warrants.

11890–1890
M'Clure v. Bennett green
ind · 1822
1 sentence

1869M’Clure v. Bennett, 1 Blackf. 189 , followed by Mectrs v. Graham, 8 Blackf. 144 , and Potts v. Henderson, 2 Ind. 327 .

11869–1869
Mears v. Graham green
ind · 1846
1 sentence

1869M’Clure v. Bennett, 1 Blackf. 189 , followed by Mectrs v. Graham, 8 Blackf. 144 , and Potts v. Henderson, 2 Ind. 327 .

11869–1869
Potts v. Henderson neutral
· 1850
1 sentence

1869M’Clure v. Bennett, 1 Blackf. 189 , followed by Mectrs v. Graham, 8 Blackf. 144 , and Potts v. Henderson, 2 Ind. 327 .

11869–1869

Where else courts name it

NY 30 (1889–2024) NJ 17 (1934–2026) IL 14 (1899–2019) WI 13 (2013–2026) CA 13 (1916–2024) PA 12 (1906–2026) MT 11 (1992–2025) GA 10 (1899–2024) TX 9 (1914–2015) MI 7 (1951–2019) NC 7 (1938–2025) VA 6 (1931–2012) IN 6 (1869–2009) WA 6 (1891–1993) MS 6 (1998–2018) MO 6 (1886–2019) FL 6 (1990–2018) OH 5 (1925–2016) IA 5 (1925–2018) MA 5 (1959–2024) OR 4 (1914–1973) AZ 4 (1984–2008) KY 3 (1977–2023) DC 3 (1978–2020) HI 3 (1999–2006) VT 3 (1968–2008) AK 3 (1985–2004) MD 3 (1916–1985) NM 2 (1939–2010) AR 2 (1960–1963) SC 2 (2015–2025) TN 2 (2004–2005) LA 2 (1979–1994) NV 2 (1971–1995) KS 2 (1887–1908)

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