Hazel v. Metropolitan Development Commission

The question before us is whether the determination of one judge has encroached upon and superceded an earlier determination by another judge whose court (albeit a different room number of the same superior court) possessed concurrent jurisdiction.

Appellants Edward B. and Martha Hazel requested a variance from the requirements of the Marion County Master Plan Permanent Zoning Ordinance with respect to property owned by the appellant as follows:

*96“69-V4-189, Edward B. Hazel, 5240 South Warman Avenue, requests variance of use to provide for the storage of repossessed automobiles, with off-street…