Legal Opinion
Klosinski v. Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy District
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided April 12, 2011No. 07A01-1008-PL-429Published
1Opinion of the Court
947 N.E.2d 429 (2011)
Phyllis and Michael KLOSINSKI, Appellants-Petitioners,
v.
CORDRY SWEETWATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, Appellee-Respondent.
No. 07A01-1008-PL-429.
Court of Appeals of Indiana.
April 12, 2011.
John Emry, Franklin, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Douglas A. Hoffman, Carson Boxberger, Bloomington, IN, Roger A. Young, Young and Young, Franklin, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
OPINION
BARNES, Judge.
Case Summary
Phyllis and Michael Klosinski appeal the trial court's judgment in their action against the Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy District ("the District"). We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Issue…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Yanoff v. MuncyIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- Huffman v. Indiana Office of Environmental AdjudicationIndiana Supreme Court · 2004
- Schrenker v. CliffordIndiana Supreme Court · 1979
- City of Gary v. Indiana Bell Telephone Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 2000
- Worman Enterprises, Inc. v. The Boone County Solid Waste Management DistrictIndiana Supreme Court · 2004
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.