State ex rel. Bd. of Zoning Appeals of City of Indianapolis v. Grant (State Report Title: State ex rel. Indianapolis v. Superior Court of Marion County), 2
| Decision Date | 04 March 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 30694,R,No. 2,2,30694 |
| Citation | 4 Ind.Dec. 636,246 Ind. 317,204 N.E.2d 658 |
| Parties | The STATE of Indiana, on the relation of the BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF the CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS and The Board of School Commissioners of the City of Indianapolis, Petitioners, v. The Honorable Wilbur H. GRANT, Judge of the Superior Court of Marion County, Indiana, Room, and the Superior Court or Marion County, Indiana, Room, Respondents.* * State Report TItle: State ex rel. Indianapolis v. Superior Court of Marion County |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
John P. Korbly, Earl Clay Ulen, Jr., Michael R. Maine, Baker & Daniels, Indianapolis, for petitioners.
Wilbur H. Grant, pro se.
Arthur J. Sullivan, Lee M. LeMay, Steers, Klee, Jay & Sullivan, Indianapolis, for respondents.
This is a case in which the Board of School Commissioners of the City of Indianapolis asked for a writ of prohibition to prevent the respondent court from entertaining a 'Petition for a writ of Certiorari' which was filed in that court by the Edgewood Villa Corporation to review a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Indianapolis granting a variance permitting the use of certain property on North Pennsylvania Street in the City of Indianapolis for parking purposes.
The petitioners, the school corporation, claimed that the respondent court lacked jurisdiction of the proceeding for a writ of certiorari by reason of the fact that the petition in that court was not verified as provided by statute. (See Burns' Ind.Stat.Anno. Sec. 53-974 [1964 Repl.])
It is argued that this statute is mandatory and jurisdictional, since this is a narrow statutory proceeding unknown at common law, and it must be strictly followed. The record shows that on September 30, 1964 the petitioners herein filed with the Superior Court a motion to dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari on the ground that the petition was not verified, and the court overruled the same.
The petitioners herein rely primarily upon the case of Ballman v. Duffecy (1952), 230 Ind. 220, 102 N.E.2d 646. The Ballman case did not deal with the failure to verify the petition, but the failure to comply with other statutory requirements providing for a statutory review.
In Gossard v. Vawter (1939), 215 Ind. 581, 21 N.E.2d 416, however, there was a failure to file a verified petition in an election contest within the prescribed ten days after Thursday next following the election. The petition filed being unverified, we held the court lacked jurisdiction to proceed on such a petition. Likewise, in State ex rel. Wever v. Reeves (1951), 229 Ind. 164, 96 N.E.2d 268, we issued a permanent writ of prohibition against the Vanderburgh Circuit Court from exercising jurisdiction in an election contest petition...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Di's, Inc. v. McKinney
...with the statutory requirements for review is a condition precedent to jurisdiction.") (citing State ex rel. Board of Zoning Appeals v. Superior Court, 246 Ind. 317, 204 N.E.2d 658 (1965)). Where a statute is silent on a procedural requirement, a rule of court may fill the gap. Board of Adj......
-
Impink v. City of Indianapolis, Bd. of Public Works
...suit. Our supreme court has held that such delay merits dismissal. State ex rel Board of Zoning Appeals of City of Indianapolis v. Grant (1965), 246 Ind. 317, 204 N.E.2d 658. Thus, the trial court properly granted Appellees' motion to dismiss as to the tort claim alleged in Count We must ne......
-
Shipshewana Convenience Corp. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of LaGrange County
...acquire jurisdiction of the parties or the particular cause. State ex rel. Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Indianapolis v. Grant (1965), 246 Ind. 317, 318, 204 N.E.2d 658, 659; Ballman v. Duffecy (1952), 230 Ind. 220, 229, 102 N.E.2d 646, 650. 9 Indeed, Indiana appellate courts have ......
-
Pappas v. State, 2-1277A448
...of the affidavit, so long as it is shown that the affidavit was duly sworn to before an authorized officer. See State v. Grant (1965), 246 Ind. 317, 204 N.E.2d 658 (petition for review from zoning appeals board); Wever v. Reeves (1951), 229 Ind. 164, 96 N.E.2d 268 (petition to contest elect......