Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Town of Dyer v. Monaldi

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided September 24, 1964No. 30,370Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring And Dissenting Opinion.

Jackson, J.

— I dissent to that part of the majority opinion reading as follows:

*591“Admittedly, such ‘plans for installation’ were not approved by either the Indiana State Board of Health or the Superintendent of the Dyer Municipal Water Utility, and there is evidence that if such plans were submitted they would not be approved by the State Board of Health.”

Title III, §4-3 of the ordinance reads as follows:

“3. Sewers: The subdivider shall provide the subdivision with a complete Sanitary Sewer System which shall connect with a sanitary sewer outlet, or provide for…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Town of Dyer v. MonaldiIndiana Supreme Court · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API