Legal Opinion

Krimendahl v. Common Council

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1971No. 30920PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeBruler, J.

The appellants, by their suit below, sought to have an amendatory re-zoning ordinance declared invalid on two grounds: First, that the procedures followed by the local plan commission and the city council in considering and enacting the amending ordinance were not in conformity with the Planning and Zoning Act of 1947, I.C. 1971, 18-7-5-1 through 18-7-5-99, being Burns §§ 53-701 through 53-795, and, second, that the amendatory ordinance and the Planning and Zoning Act are unconstitutional and void, as in violation of Art. 1, § 12, of the Indiana Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Hyson v. Montgomery County CouncilCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
  3. Ball v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1961
  4. Town of Walkerton v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Mogilner v. METROPOLITAN PLAN COMM., ETC.Indiana Supreme Court · 1957

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Montgomery v. Bremer County Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1980
  2. City of Hobart Common Council v. Behavioral Institute of Indiana, LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2003
  3. Abrams v. LegbandtIndiana Court of Appeals · 1974
  4. Pruden v. TrabitsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1977
  5. Lawrence Preservation Alliance, Inc. v. Allen Realty, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1991

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API