« Law - "Victory for wine lovers sours as Michigan tries again to ban direct shipping" | Main | Ind. Decisions - More on Indiana's Little Hatch Act »

Sunday, November 30, 2008

Ind. Decisions - "Jeffersonville annex could go to high court"

The Court of Appeals decision August 15th in the case of Bruce Herdt, Louis Evans and Charlie Milburn v. City of Jeffersonville, Indiana and Common Council for Jeffersonville, Indiana (see ILB summary here, 6th case; see list of entries here), is the subject of a story today in the Jeffersonville / New Albany News & Tribune. David A. Mann reports in a long story that begins:

Plaintiffs in remonstrance of last year’s annexation of the Oak Park Conservancy District have asked the Indiana Supreme Court to hear their case.

That’s after the Clark County Circuit Court and the Indiana Court of Appeals dismissed the case earlier this year.

According to Bruce Herdt, lead plaintiff in the remonstrance, the petition to the Indiana Supreme Court was made Nov. 21. There is no deadline by which the court has to decide to hear the case or not.

The protest relates to a 2007 annexation by the Jeffersonville City Council, which — according to the fiscal plan that passed with it — took in 7,806 acres of land and an estimated 3,360 households north and east of the old city limits. Herdt and others dispute the number of households.

The annexation was done in six tracts, four of which were made final earlier this year. Two areas — known legally as area B and area E — were protested. The case on which the courts have been deciding isn’t on the annexation itself, but on the legal procedure of the protest.

Under state law, a remonstrance to an annexation has to be filed within 90 days and signatures of 65 percent of those affected by the annexation have to be included with the legal complaint.

Derrick Wilson, the attorney representing those remonstrating, filed paperwork on the 90th day of the period without the signatures. They were filed as an amendment to the original complaint a few days later.

Earlier this year, former Clark Circuit Judge Daniel F. Donahue granted a motion to dismiss from the city, which argued that the needed materials weren’t filed on time.

Wilson argued that the amendment containing the signatures related back to the original filing.

Both the trial court and the appeals court sided with the city.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on November 30, 2008 12:51 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions