Indiana DLandowner's request for floodway construction permit was denied by the Natural Resources Commission (NRC), and landowner sought judicial review. The Marion Superior Court, James S. Kirsch, J., vacated NRC's order. NRC appealed. The Court of Appeals, Ratliff, C.J., held that: (1) landowner had burden of proving that no harm would come to fish, wildlife or botanical resources through its proposed construction (2) property was "floodway" within meaning of Indiana Flood Control Act and (8) landowner was not denied fundamental due process.epartment of Natural Resources v. United Refuse Co.
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
RATLIFF®, Chief Judge.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Indiana Department of Natural Resources ("DNR"), through the Indiana Natural Resources Commission ("NRC"),3 appeals from a judgment vacating its order denying United Refuse Company, Inc.'s ("United") request for a floodway construction permit. We reverse and remand.
ISSUES
We restate the issues on appeal as:
1. Did United fail to carry its burden of proof in showing that its permit application complied with all of the statutory prerequisites for its proposed floodway construction?
2. Are the NRC's findings and conclusions supported by substantial…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Jewell Grain Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1990
- Hamilton County Department of Public Welfare v. SmithIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
- Wedmore v. Jordan Motors, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1992
- Hardesty v. BolerjackIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
- Vanderburgh County v. WestIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Indiana Department of Natural Resources v. United Refuse Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1993
- Indiana Civil Rights Commission v. Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1995
- Indiana Department of Natural Resources v. United Refuse Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1993