Legal Opinion

Murray v. City of Lawrenceburg

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided April 20, 2010No. 15S04-0907-CV-310PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BOEHM, Justice.

We hold that inverse condemnation is the sole remedy for a governmental act that purports to exercise all rights of ownership over a parcel of land. We also hold that the six year statute of limitations for trespass applies to such a claim. As a result, the statute of limitations bars the plaintiffs' suit in 2005 seeking to claim ownership of land leased in 1997 by the City of Lawrenceburg to a private party.

Facts and Procedural History

Because this is an appeal from the denial of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, we accept the allegations of the complaint as true.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Kelo v. City of New LondonSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  2. Wehling v. Citizens National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Noblesville Redevelopment Commmission v. Noblesville Associates Ltd. PartnershipIndiana Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Dible v. City of LafayetteIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Schnull v. Indianapolis Union Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. ESPN, Inc. and Paula Lavigne v. University of Notre Dame Police DepartmentIndiana Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Woodruff v. Indiana Family & Social Services AdministrationIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Veolia Water Indianapolis, LLC v. National Trust Insurance Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 2014
  4. KS&E Sports and Edward J. Ellis v. Dwayne H. RunnelsIndiana Supreme Court · 2017
  5. Tina Gerlach v. Todd RokitaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2024

42 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