Board of Com'rs of Lake County, Ind. v. Foster
| Decision Date | 26 May 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 45A03-9206-CV-178,45A03-9206-CV-178 |
| Parties | BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, INDIANA; Leslie Pruitt, as Sheriff of Lake County; and Sheriff's Merit Board of Lake County, Appellants-Defendants, v. Edward FOSTER, Individually and on Behalf of all Others Similarly Situated, Appellees-Plaintiffs. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
James B. Meyer, King and Meyer, P.C., Gary, for appellants-defendants.
William H. Tobin, Ruman, Clements, Tobin & Holub, P.C., Hammond, for appellees-plaintiffs.
Appellants-defendants Board of Commissioners of Lake County, Indiana; Leslie Pruitt as Sheriff of Lake County; and Sheriff's Merit Board of Lake County (collectively referred to as Board) bring this interlocutory appeal from an order holding the Board liable for monetary damages and/or compensatory time off to employees on certain days since 1973, in a complaint for declaratory judgment, injunction, and damages. The following issue is dispositive of this attempted appeal: whether the Board forfeited its right to appeal by filing an untimely praecipe.
This case involves a class action claim by the merit employees of the Lake County Sheriff's Department (collectively referred to as Foster) for compensation for working holidays listed on schedules promulgated by the Board of Commissioners and/or the County Council and a request for an order requiring the Board to compensate the employees according to the promulgated schedules in the future. The original complaint was filed by Foster on October 4, 1978.
On December 18, 1989, the trial court ordered that there would be a bifurcated bench trial separating the issues of liability and damages. On May 21, 1992, the trial court after a bench trial on the liability phase of the case, entered its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judgment. The trial court concluded that the Board was liable to Foster, individually and as a class, "for unpaid holiday compensation and/or compensatory time off, and that the plaintiffs' [Foster's] damages and/or other relief shall be determined at a later hearing following additional discovery on those issues." The trial court also certified its order for interlocutory appeal pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 4(B)(6). Pursuant to the Indiana appellate rules, the Board filed its petition to appeal the interlocutory order on June 12, 1992. On August 12, 1992, this Court granted the Board's petition to appeal the interlocutory order pursuant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hogan v. Review Bd. of Indiana Dept. of Employment and Training Services
...... James H. HOGAN, Appellant, . v. . REVIEW BOARD OF the INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND . ...IND.APP., 635 N.E.2D 181; 1 ST. AMAND-ZION V. ... out the purpose of their creation." Knox County Council v. State ex rel McCormick (1940) 217 Ind. ...of Comm'rs of Lake County v. Foster (1993) 3d Dist.Ind.App, 614 ......
-
Greer v. State
...... Ind.Appellate Rule 2(A). The failure to timely file ... be remanded to the custody of the Shelby County Sheriff's Department and, subsequently, the Noble ... Board of Com'rs of Lake County v. Foster, 614 N.E.2d ......
-
Poracky v. State Bd. of Tax Com'rs
......PORACKY, Petitioner,. v. STATE BOARD OF TAX COMMISSIONERS, Respondent. No. ... I. Whether the Porter County Land Valuation Order (the Land Order) correctly ...v. State Bd. of Tax Comm'rs (1994), Ind.Tax, 628 N.E.2d 1260, 1263 (quoting Bielski v. ... Road in Ogden Dunes has a panoramic view of Lake Michigan and the Chicago skyline, and is assessed ... See Board of Comm'rs of Lake County v. Foster (1993), Ind.App., 614 N.E.2d 949, 950. Thus, ......
-
Vaughn v. Schnitz
...... within which to file the praecipe based upon Ind. Trial Rule 72(E). The trial court denied ...denied, 645 N.E.2d 23; Bd. of Comm'rs of Lake County, Indiana v. Foster, 614 N.E.2d 949 ......