Legal Opinion
Arnold v. City of Terre Haute
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided May 27, 1999No. 84A04-9807-CV-368PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STATON, Judge
Larry and Sally Arnold, et al. (Remon-strators) appeal from the trial court’s dismissal of their claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Remonstrators present one issue for our review, which we restate as: whether a remonstrance pursuant to Ind. Code § 36-4-3-ll(a)(l) (1993) requires signatures of a majority of landowners or signatures of the owners of a majority of parcels.
We reverse and remand.
The City of Terre Haute annexed 1,715 acres of land in January, 1998. A remonstrance was filed on March 4, 1998. At that time, the remonstrators represented a majority of…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Indiana Department of Human Services v. FirthIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992
- Detterline v. BonaventuraIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
- State v. Windy City Fireworks, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1992
- DOAN v. City of Fort WayneIndiana Supreme Court · 1969
- State v. Windy City Fireworks, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Larry and Sally Arnold v. City of Terre HauteIndiana Supreme Court · 2000