Klosinski v. Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy District
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
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.
Issues
The Klosinskis raise several issues, which we consolidate and restate as whether the trial court erred by partially denying their request for injunctive relief. On cross appeal, the District argues that the trial court erred by finding that the Klo-sinskis were “aggrieved” parties for purposes of filing a mandate or injunction action against the District pursuant to…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Yanoff v. MuncyIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- Huffman v. Indiana Office of Environmental AdjudicationIndiana Supreme Court · 2004
- 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
- City of Hammond v. Board of Zoning AppealsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1972
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Klosinski v. Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy DistrictIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011