Gardner v. Grills

Decision Date27 June 1961
Docket NumberNo. 30050,30050
Citation175 N.E.2d 696,242 Ind. 29
PartiesDorothy GARDNER, as Auditor of the State of Indiana, Appellant, v. Nelson G. GRILLS, Appellee.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Frank E. Spencer, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Nelson G. Grills, Indianapolis, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Appellee brought this suit as a duly elected and legally acting member of the State Senate, and as a taxpayer and citizen of the State of Indiana, to enjoin defendant, Auditor of the State of Indiana, from 'allowing, auditing or countersigning every demand and claim presented for payment which arises out of any action taken by the State Budget Committee.'

The complaint alleges that two duly elected and acting members of the State Senate and two duly elected and acting members of the House of Representatives of the State of Indiana, together with the State Budget Director, are purporting to act as the State Budget Committee; that on January 20, 1960, such committee authorized the expenditures of State funds and approved increases in the salaries of State employees under the terms of a statute 1 which permitted the State Budget Committee and the Governor to establish classifications and schedules for fixing salaries and wages of all classes of State employees that the State Budget Committee has approved additions to appropriations made by the General Assembly for State agencies; and '[t]hat any claim or demand presented for payment arising out of the action of the purported State Budget Committee on January 20, 1960, is an illegal claim for the reason that a majority of the members of the State Budget Committee are members of the legislature, and the State Budget Committee is a department of the executive branch of the government and such membership is in violation of the provisions of Article III, Section I of the Constitution of Indiana because it attempts to confer executive administrative duties upon members of the legislature.'

After hearing evidence and arguments of counsel, the trial court found that that part of the Budget Committee Act which provides for the appointment of members of the Legislature to serve on the Budget Committee is unconstitutional and, on September 27, 1960, permanently enjoined the Auditor of State 'from allowing, auditing, counter-signing and paying any demand, claim, or voucher presented for payment arising out of any future action taken by the State Budget Committee of the State of Indiana, as it is now constituted, from this day henceforth.'

The case was argued in this court on June 7, 1961, at which time appellant filed motion to transfer to the Appellate Court asserting that this cause had been incorrectly filed in this court and should be transferred to the Appellate Court because the question of constitutionality on which our jurisdiction allegedly depends is not properly presented. We disagree with appellant, but deem it unnecessary to extend this opinion by stating the reasons the motion, in our judgment, is not well taken. Such motion is consequently overruled.

Subsequently, on June 16, 1961, appellee filed herein his verified motion to dismiss and vacate the order of injunction, asserting that the General Assembly, by the enactment of § 18, of ch. 123 of the Acts of 1961,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Juvenile, In re
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • January 31, 1974
  • Kaminsky v. Medical Licensing Bd. of Indiana
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • August 11, 1987
    ...340, 342, 375 N.E.2d 205, 207; State v. Morgan Superior Court (1967), 249 Ind. 220, 221-22, 231 N.E.2d 516, 518; Gardner v. Grills (1961), 242 Ind. 29, 33, 175 N.E.2d 696, 697; Haggerty v. Bloomington Board of Public Safety (1985), Ind.App., 474 N.E.2d 114, 115-16; Bartholomew County Hospit......
  • State ex rel. Branigin v. Morgan Superior Court
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • December 7, 1967
    ...incidental questions. 'West Ind. Law Encyclopedia, Chap. 11, § 419, p. 293.' However, in the case of Gardner, as Auditor, etc. v. Grills, (1961) 242 Ind. 29, 175 N.E.2d 696, this court held that an appeal will be dismissed when it presents only a moot question unless it involves a matter of......
  • Sowers v. Laporte Superior Court, No. II
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • August 29, 1991
    ...claim is moot, we believe this action involves a matter of great public interest and affects the public generally. Gardner v. Grills (1961), 242 Ind. 29, 175 N.E.2d 696. Because perpetuation of testimony under Rule 27 is a device available to any litigant upon a showing of the appropriate c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT