Huff v. Indiana State Highway Commission, No. 29514
| Docket Nº | No. 29514 |
| Citation | 238 Ind. 280, 149 N.E.2d 299 |
| Case Date | April 11, 1958 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
Page 299
v.
INDIANA STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION, Indiana State Highway
Department, Virgil W. Smith, William H. Sorrell, Deane E.
Walker, as members of the Indiana State Highway Department,
Edwin K. Steers, as Attorney General of the State of
Indiana, Appellees.
Rehearing Denied May 26, 1958.
[238 Ind. 282]
Page 300
Schlosser, Young & Scholosser, Chalmer Schlosser, Jr., Symmes, Fleming & Symmes, Indianapolis, for appellants.Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., Richard G. Stewart, Frank X. Haupt and Jack C. Daw, Deputy Attys. Gen., for appellees.
EMMERT, Chief Justice.
This is an appeal from a judgment by the trial court denying relief to the appellants in an action, under Ch. 365 of the 1947 Acts, § 63-3001 to § 63-3030, Burns' 1951 Replacement (as amended), to review a determination and order of the State Highway Department of Indiana, which denied an application by appellants to have access to State Road No. 100 at the intersection of said road with 56th Street in the City of Indianapolis for filling station purposes. The assignment of errors has many specifications, but only the errors presented by the argument section of appellants' original brief, as required by Rule 2-17, will be considered, since failure to comply with the Rule waives any error. Rule 2-17, subsection (f).
On March 26, 1956, appellants filed a petition with the Department to open a driveway into State Road No. 100 which was on the east side of their read estate, for a filling station. On May 2nd the Department denied the petition. On June 4th appellants filed a petition to reconsider
Page 301
the first denial of the petition, upon which a hearing was had at which appellants appeared in person and were represented by counsel. This hearing fully complied with § 63-3024, Burns' 1951 Replacement. 1 [238 Ind. 283] 1 The hearing before the Department was had June 4, 1956, and the matter then taken under advisement. On July 3rd, by a resolution duly adopted, the application for a permit was denied.On November 2, 1955, by resolution duly adopted, the State Highway Department of Indiana found State Highway No. 100 was heavily traveled and designed for through traffic; that it served as a by-pass highway to the east, northeast and north of the City of Indianapolis; that it was part of a proposed 'Circum-Urban' or belt highway to extend completely around Indianapolis and connect all the State and United States highway routes entering the Indianapolis area; that it was part of a route of the national system of interstate highways; that a part of said highway on Shadeland Avenue, from a junction of U. S. Highway No. 40 to the intersection of State Highway 67, had been constructed as a four-lane highway with two separate roadways; and that the traffic conditions on said highway then and int he future justified the designation and establishment of a portion of this highway for approximately 9 miles, from a distance of 1,126 feet north of the intersection of said highway No. 100 with United States Highway No. 40 northward to the intersection of said highway with 82nd Street near the east [238 Ind. 284] edge of Castleton in Marion County, as a limited access facility pursuant to Ch. 245 of the 1945 Acts (as amended), §§ 36-3101 to 36-3111, Burns' 1949 Replacement. Upon such finding the resolution declared and constituted said State Highway No. 100 a limited access facility 'and that access to and egress from said State Highway No. 100, between said points, shall be and are hereby limited to the designated intersections at the following approximate locations * * *.' No access was provided for the place in controversy.
By § 1 of the Limited Access Facility Highways Act, the Legislature declared the Act was necessary 'for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety and for the promotion of the general welfare.' Section 36-3101, Burns' 1949 Replacement. Various other sections material to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Ensley, No. 29760
...State v. Marion Circuit Court, et al., 1958, 238 Ind. 637, 643, 153 N.E.2d 327; Huff, et al. v. Indiana State Highway Commission, 1958, 238 Ind. 280, 286, 149 N.E.2d 299; Martin v. Marks, 1900, 154 Ind. 549, 556, 57 N.E. 249; Lostutter v. City of Aurora, [240 Ind. 488] et al., 1891, 126 Ind......
-
Barker v. State, No. 29554
...State, 1879, 66 Ind. 428. Under the offense charged in this case it was necessary to prove that the appellant killed 'with premeditated'[238 Ind. 280] malice. In other words, the proof must show the defendant had time to deliberate upon the intent and design to take life. We have said befor......
-
State v. Innkeepers of New Castle, Inc., No. 779S196
...and egress to a public highway may not be taken from him without compensation. Huff et al. v. Indiana State Highway Commission, (1958) 238 Ind. 280, 149 N.E.2d 299; Ross v. Thompson, (1881) 78 Ind. 90; Burton Page 465 v. Sparks, (1941) 109 Ind.App. 531, 36 N.E.2d 962. It is immaterial, ther......
-
State v. Geiger & Peters, Inc., No. 30302
...due compensation, citing State etc. v. Marion Circuit Court et al. (1958), supra. See also: Huff et al. v. Ind. State Hwy. Comm. (1958), 238 Ind. 280, 149 N.E.2d The facts of the Ensley case were indeed distinguishable from the case at bar as in the former case the property owners were clai......
-
State v. Ensley, No. 29760
...State v. Marion Circuit Court, et al., 1958, 238 Ind. 637, 643, 153 N.E.2d 327; Huff, et al. v. Indiana State Highway Commission, 1958, 238 Ind. 280, 286, 149 N.E.2d 299; Martin v. Marks, 1900, 154 Ind. 549, 556, 57 N.E. 249; Lostutter v. City of Aurora, [240 Ind. 488] et al., 1891, 126 Ind......
-
Barker v. State, No. 29554
...State, 1879, 66 Ind. 428. Under the offense charged in this case it was necessary to prove that the appellant killed 'with premeditated'[238 Ind. 280] malice. In other words, the proof must show the defendant had time to deliberate upon the intent and design to take life. We have said befor......
-
State v. Innkeepers of New Castle, Inc., No. 779S196
...and egress to a public highway may not be taken from him without compensation. Huff et al. v. Indiana State Highway Commission, (1958) 238 Ind. 280, 149 N.E.2d 299; Ross v. Thompson, (1881) 78 Ind. 90; Burton Page 465 v. Sparks, (1941) 109 Ind.App. 531, 36 N.E.2d 962. It is immaterial, ther......
-
State v. Geiger & Peters, Inc., No. 30302
...due compensation, citing State etc. v. Marion Circuit Court et al. (1958), supra. See also: Huff et al. v. Ind. State Hwy. Comm. (1958), 238 Ind. 280, 149 N.E.2d The facts of the Ensley case were indeed distinguishable from the case at bar as in the former case the property owners were clai......