Indiana State Personnel Bd. v. Parkman, No. 20675
| Docket Nº | 369S49 |
| Citation | 252 Ind. 44, 245 N.E.2d 153 |
| Case Date | March 12, 1969 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
Page 153
Ira PARKMAN, Appellee.
[252 Ind. 45]
Page 154
John J. Dillon, Atty. Gen., Douglas B. McFadden, Duejean C. Garrett, Asst. Attys. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellant.Isadore D. Rosenfeld, South Bend, Alvin D. Blieden, Michigan City, for appellee.
HUNTER, Judge.
From 1958 to 1964, Ira Parkman, the respondent, was employed as Hospital Administrator at the Indiana State Prison. On April 10, 1964, the prison Warden notified Parkman that he was suspended for thirty days and that at the end of said period of time his employment would be terminated. He was informed of the reasons for the action and of his right to appeal to the Indiana State Personnel Board.
On or about April 16, 1964, Parkman did appeal to the Personnel Board. A hearing was held on April 26 and 27, 1965, and, on June 10, 1965, the Board issued a ruling upholding his dismissal. On June 16, 1965, Parkman filed three documents with the Marion County Superior Court:
(1) A 'NOTICE OF FILING AN APPEAL' addressed to the Secretary of the Indiana State Personnel Board and to the Deputy Attorney General. (At the bottom of this document, the Secretary of the Personnel Board has signed an acknowledgment that he received a copy of the notice.)
(2) A 'CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND CHANGE', containing a 'finding of facts and final determination' by the Personnel Board.
(3) The letter which Parkman received from the Warden informing him of his dismissal and advising him of his right to appeal.
On June 21, 1965, Parkman's attorney sent a letter to the Judge of the Marion County Superior Court explaining that the appeal was brought pursuant to Ind.Ann.Stat. § 60--1350 [252 Ind. 46] (1961 Repl.) and requesting that the court set a date for a hearing. No other pleading or document was filed before July 6, 1965, when the Attorney General filed a motion to dismiss on the following grounds:
'1. The Appellant has not followed the statutory procedure to give this Court jurisdiction in this cause.
2. The Appellant has failed to ive this Court jurisdiction by securing a certified copy of the transcript of the proceedings before the administrative agency within fifteen (15) days of filing the appeal.
3. The Appellant specifically requests a trial de novo and this Court has no jurisdiction to determine said cause de novo.
4. The Appellant has failed to give this Court jurisdiction in that he has not filed this appeal in the county of his residence or the county in which the dismissal order or determination is to be carried out and enforced as required by law.
Page 155
5. The Appellant has failed to properly commence this action by serving his petition on the Attorney General of the State of Indiana.'
In a memorandum filed with the motion, the Attorney General contended that the Administrative Adjudication and Court Review Act, Ind.Ann.Stat. §§ 63--3001 to 3030 (1961 Repl.) governed an appeal from a decision of the Indiana State Personnel Board, and that the procedures established by this Act had not been followed by the respondent. The Superior Court overruled the motion to dismiss, and this Court declined to grant the Attorney General's petition for a writ of prohibition.
On April 4, 1966, the Attorney General filed a transcript of the hearing before the Indiana State Personnel...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hogan v. Review Bd. of Indiana Dept. of Employment and Training Services, Q-1
...assignment of errors was fatal. Indiana State Personnel Bd. v. Parkman (1968) 142 Ind.App. 255, 233 N.E.2d 798, rev'd on other grounds, 252 Ind. 44, 245 N.E.2d 153. In Lugar, the appellant's motion to correct errors challenged the judgment upon several grounds, but not upon the basis that t......
-
City of Marion v. Antrobus, No. 2-582A143
...precludes judicial review of an administrative adjudication as a matter of law. See e.g., Indiana State Personnel Board v. Parkman, (1969) 252 Ind. 44, 245 N.E.2d 153; Gleason v. Real Estate Commission, (1973) 157 Ind.App. 344, 300 N.E.2d 116. However, the jurisdictional defect involved in ......
-
Indiana Civil Rights Com'n v. City of Muncie, No. 2-1082A350
...compliance with the requirements of this section is a condition precedent to jurisdiction. Personnel Board v. Parkman, (1969) 252 Ind. 44, 245 N.E.2d 153; White v. Bd. of Med. Regis. and Exam. (1956) 235 Ind. 572, 134 N.E.2d 556; Ind. Civil Rights Comm. v. Int'l. Union, (1979) 179 Ind.App. ......
-
Shipshewana Convenience Corp. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of LaGrange County, No. 44
...employee discharge, Indiana Dep't of Highways v. Dixon (1989), Ind., 541 N.E.2d 877, 879; Indiana State Personnel Bd. v. Parkman (1969), 252 Ind. 44, 49, 245 N.E.2d 153, 156; state employee work assignments, State v. Van Ulzen (1983), Ind.App., 456 N.E.2d 459, 464, trans. denied; profession......
-
Hogan v. Review Bd. of Indiana Dept. of Employment and Training Services, Q-1
...assignment of errors was fatal. Indiana State Personnel Bd. v. Parkman (1968) 142 Ind.App. 255, 233 N.E.2d 798, rev'd on other grounds, 252 Ind. 44, 245 N.E.2d 153. In Lugar, the appellant's motion to correct errors challenged the judgment upon several grounds, but not upon the basis that t......
-
City of Marion v. Antrobus, No. 2-582A143
...precludes judicial review of an administrative adjudication as a matter of law. See e.g., Indiana State Personnel Board v. Parkman, (1969) 252 Ind. 44, 245 N.E.2d 153; Gleason v. Real Estate Commission, (1973) 157 Ind.App. 344, 300 N.E.2d 116. However, the jurisdictional defect involved in ......
-
Indiana Civil Rights Com'n v. City of Muncie, No. 2-1082A350
...compliance with the requirements of this section is a condition precedent to jurisdiction. Personnel Board v. Parkman, (1969) 252 Ind. 44, 245 N.E.2d 153; White v. Bd. of Med. Regis. and Exam. (1956) 235 Ind. 572, 134 N.E.2d 556; Ind. Civil Rights Comm. v. Int'l. Union, (1979) 179 Ind.App. ......
-
Shipshewana Convenience Corp. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of LaGrange County, No. 44
...employee discharge, Indiana Dep't of Highways v. Dixon (1989), Ind., 541 N.E.2d 877, 879; Indiana State Personnel Bd. v. Parkman (1969), 252 Ind. 44, 49, 245 N.E.2d 153, 156; state employee work assignments, State v. Van Ulzen (1983), Ind.App., 456 N.E.2d 459, 464, trans. denied; profession......