James Johns v. Pike County Commissioners

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: August 20, 2012
• Docket: 63A01-1112-MI-607
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE:

BOYD A. TOLER DOUGLAS A. HOFFMAN Toler Law Office JEREMY M. DILTS Petersburg, Indiana Carson Boxberger LLP

FILED Bloomington, Indiana

Aug 20 2012, 9:35 am IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA CLERK of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

JAMES JOHNS, ) ) Appellant-Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) No. 63A01-1112-MI-607 ) PIKE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ) ) Appellee-Respondent. )

APPEAL FROM THE PIKE CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable W. Timothy Crowley, Special Judge Cause No. 63C01-1105-MI-141

August 20, 2012

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

GARRARD, Senior Judge James Johns brought this appeal to challenge a grant of judgment on the pleadings

to the Pike County Commissioners. He sought judicial review of the Commissioners’

action extending a road closure agreement. He claimed an interest in a church camp

accessed by the road and in the road itself.

During the pendency of this appeal the church camp was sold to a third party and

the Commissioners have moved to dismiss the appeal as moot.

Johns asserted no interest in the road itself that is distinguishable from that of the

public in general. As such, he fails to meet the definition of an aggrieved person, and that

is necessary to have standing to challenge the Commissioners’ action. See Ind. Code § 8-

20-1-72 (1988). To be aggrieved a person must have suffered, or be likely to suffer,

harm to a legal interest other than that which would be sustained by the public as a whole.

Reed v. Plan Comm’n of Munster, 810 N.E.2d 1126, 1128 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), trans.

denied. We therefore affirm the judgment on the pleadings as to Johns’ claim concerning

the road.

The balance of the appeal we dismiss as moot because the camp in question has

been sold to Solar Sources, successor to the mining company that originally secured the

closure.

Affirmed in part, dismissed as moot in part.

BAKER, J., and KIRSCH, J., concur.