Legal Opinion
Bowling v. Pence
District Court, S.D. Indiana
Decided August 19, 2014No. 1:14-cv-00405-RLY-TABPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ENTRY ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
RICHARD L. YOUNG, Chief Judge.
Plaintiffs, Michelle Bowling, Shannon Bowling, and Linda Bruner, all currently reside in Indiana and are members of same-sex marriages. Plaintiffs brought suit against the Defendants to challenge the constitutionality of Indiana Code Section 31—11—1—1(b), which states: “A marriage between persons of the same gender is void in Indiana even if the marriage is lawful in the place where it is solemnized.” Plaintiffs and Defendants filed cross motions for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the court GRANTS…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Sandra L. Waldridge v. American Hoechst Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Obergefell v. HodgesSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
- Pidgeon v. ParkerDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2014
- Condon v. HaleyDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2014
- Clayton Cangelosi v. State of LouisianaDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2025
- Eason v. PritzkerDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.